You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Correspondence
Response to: ‘Convalescent troponin and cardiovascular death following acute coronary syndrome’ by Kawada
  1. Philip D Adamson1,2,
  2. Nicholas L Mills1,
  3. David E Newby1,
  4. Richard W Troughton2,
  5. Rob N Doughty3,
  6. A Mark Richards2
  1. 1 BHF Centre for Cardiovascular Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
  2. 2 Christchurch Heart Institute, University of Otago Christchurch, Christchurch, New Zealand
  3. 3 Department of Medicine, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
  1. Correspondence to Dr Philip D Adamson, BHF Centre for Cardiovascular Sciences, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH16 4SU, UK; Philip.adamson{at}cdhb.health.nz

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2020-316547

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    The Authors’ reply: We thank the author for their interest in our report documenting the long-term prognostic importance of convalescent cardiac troponin concentrations.1

    First, we agree that when used for risk stratification low cardiac troponin concentrations miss fewer events than applying the sex-specific 99th centile upper reference limit as a single threshold, and indeed we identified the lower troponin threshold of 5 ng/L to be associated with a 5-year negative predictive value for cardiovascular death of 97.1% (95% CI 95.5 to …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors PDA drafted the letter. All authors contributed to revision of the letter.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, conduct, reporting or dissemination plans of this research.

    • Patient consent for publication Not required.

    • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles