Clinical and pathobiologic considerations in the evaluation of markers of myocardial ischemia
There is a need for blood-based analytic techniques that allow for the detection of patients either with reversible myocardial ischemia or who are at risk for myocardial ischemia. However, given the diverse etiologies of unstable angina and the complex interactions among various cell types, the term “marker for ischemia” should be used with caution (if at all). Unless we find a protein that is released across the diverse pathologic triggers associated with the various stages of progression of atherosclerosis and cellular ischemia, we will be forced to consider a spectrum of proteins (and analytic assays) that are situationally specific. The choice of an appropriate gold standard as we investigate the clinical application of these assays will be one of the most difficult and most important decisions in these studies. It will be critical that conclusions of usefulness in one setting of ischemic heart disease not be generalized in the absence of clinical trials supporting that contention.
Key WordsIschemia biomarkers myocardial infarction
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Adams, J.E. and Miracle, V.A. (2001). Acute coronary syndromes: pathophysiology, clinical presentation, and initial diagnostic strategies, in Markers in Cardiology: Current and Future Clinical Applications (J.E. Adams, F.S. Apple, A.S. Jaffe, and A.H.B. Wu, eds), pp. 47–63, Futura Publishing, Armonk, NY.Google Scholar
- 3.Cannon, C.P., McCabe, C.H., Stone, P.H., Rogers, W.J., Schactman, M., Thompson, B.W., et al. (1997). The electrocardiogram predicts one-year outcome of patients with unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction: results of the TIMI III Registry ECG Ancillary Study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 30:133–140.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Joint European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology (2000). Myocardial infarction redefined—a consensus document of the Joint European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology Committee for the Redefinition of Myocardial Infarction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 36:959–969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Ohman, E.M., Armstrong, P.W., White, H.D., Granger, C.B., Wilcox, R.G., Weaver, W.D. et al. (1999). Risk stratification with a point-of-care cardiac troponin T test in acute myocardial infarction. GUSTOIII Investigators. Global use of strategies to open occluded coronary arteries. Am. J. Cardiol. 84(11):1281–1286.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Dalager-Pedersen, S., Pedersen, E.M., Ringgaard, S., and Falk, E. (1998). Coronary artery disease: plaque vulnerability, disruption, and thrombosis, in The Vulnerable Atherosclerotic Plaque: Understanding, Identification and Modification (V. Fuster, ed), pp. 1–23. Futura Publishing, Armonk, NY.Google Scholar
- 18.Gibson, R.S. and Beller, G.A. (1982). Should exercise electrocardiographic testing be replaced by radioisotope methods? in Controversies in Coronary Artery Disease (S.H. Rahimtoola and A.D. Brest, eds), pp. 1–31, F.A. Davis, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
- 20.Mercho, N., Waters, D., Craven, T., et al. (1995). Quantitative coronary arteriographic comparison of the culprit lesions of unstable angina and myocardial infarction in a prospectively defined population. Circulation 92(Suppl I):I-719.Google Scholar
- 21.Little, W.C., Constantinescu, M., Applegate, R.J., et al. (1998). Can arteriography predict the site of a subsequent myocardial infarction in patients with mild-to-moderate coronary artery disease? Circulation 78:1157–1166.Google Scholar