How well do laboratories adhere to recommended clinical guidelines for the management of myocardial infarction: The cardiac marker guidelines uptake in Europe study (carmague)

BACKGROUND: We undertook an assessment of current use of evidence-based guidelines for the use of cardiac biomarkers in Europe (EU) and North America (NA). METHODS: In 2013-2014 a web-based questionnaire was distributed via NA and EU biochemical societies. Questions covered cardiac biomarkers measured, analytical methods used, decision thresholds, and use of decisionmaking protocols. Results were collated using a central database and analyzed using comparative and descriptive nonparametric statistics. RESULTS: In EU, returns were obtained from 442 hospitals, 50% central or university hospitals, and 39% from local hospitals from 35 countries with 395/442 (89%) provided an acute service. In NA there were 91 responses (63.7% central or university hospitals, 19.8% community hospitals) with 76/91 (83.5%) providing an acute service. Cardiac troponin was the preferred cardiac biomarker in 99.5% (EU) and 98.7% (NA), and the first line marker in 97.7% (EU) and 97.4% (NA). There were important differences in the choice of decision limits and their derivations. The origin of the information was also significantly different, with EU vsNAas follows: package insert, 61.9% vs 40%; publications, 17.1% vs 15.0%; local clinical or analytical validation choice, 21.0% vs 45.0%; P 0.0003. CONCLUSIONS: There are significant differences between EU and NA use of cardiac biomarkers. This probably relates to different availability of assays between EU and NA (such as high-sensitivity troponin assays) and different laboratory practices on assay introduction (greater local evaluation of assay performance occurred in NA).