Search

Background: The morphological examination of urinary sediment (MEUS) is traditionally associated with urinalysis (UA), with workload implications and the need for automation of its execution., Methods: Considering MEUS as a test requiring specialized knowhow and skill for its execution, since 2005 in our laboratory it is performed for inpatients only upon specific request. Eleven years after, we have analyzed the long-term impact of this approach on the provided service. We evaluated results in the 2009-2016 period, in which our hospital did not undergo any change both in the number of beds and in the clinical case-mix., Results: From 2009 to 2013 an average of 2264 MEUS and 10,204 UA per year were ordered, respectively, with an average ratio of 22.2%. Since 2014, a change on computerized order entry involving MEUS caused a further decrease of its requests (in average, 923 per year), which was not associated to a decrease in UA (in average, 9810 per year) (in average, MEUS/UA 9.4%). MEUS requests came mainly from Paediatrics (47.8%), Nephrology (20.9%) and Rheumatology (18.3%) wards. By filling a satisfaction survey, clinical wards evaluated the provided service as satisfactory, while highlighting some critical issues, mainly referred to preanalytical phase., Conclusions: The alternative proposal for managing MEUS presented in this paper markedly reduces the number of requests and increases their appropriateness. This is achieved without any negative impact on patient care., (Copyright by Società Italiana di Nefrologia SIN, Rome, Italy.)

Chemotherapy is a well established therapeutic approach for several malignancies, but its clinical efficacy is often limited by related cardiotoxicity leading to cardiomyopathy evolving towards heart failure that may worsen the patient outcome. To detect cardiac damage, the most frequently adopted diagnostic approach is the estimation of left ventricular ejection fraction by echocardiography, showing, however, low sensitivity in early prediction of cardiomyopathy, when appropriate treatments could still improve the patient's outcome. Cardiospecific biomarkers, like cardiac troponins, show high diagnostic efficacy in the early, subclinical phase of disease, becoming positive approximately 3 months before clinical onset of cardiomyopathy. Furthermore, the increase in their concentrations is well correlated with the disease severity and may predict the occurrence of major cardiac events during follow-up. On the other hand, negative troponin concentrations may identify patients with a very low risk of cardiomyopathy (negative predictive value = 99%). For cardiac natriuretic peptides, definitive evidence about a diagnostic or prognostic role in predicting chemotherapy-induced cardiomyopathy is lacking and their practical use in this context cannot be recommended until their clinical efficacy is clearly defined.

Background: The Joint European Society of Cardiology and the American College of Cardiology Committee has recently reviewed the criteria to diagnose myocardial infarction, focusing on the central role of biochemical criterium and indicating the cardiac troponins as the reference marker. However, at present, little is known upon how "old" and "new" biochemical markers of myocardial damage are utilized in daily clinical practice., Methods: We performed a survey across the whole set of Italian coronary care units (CCUs) to evaluate the actual behavior of the clinicians in detecting myocardial necrosis with the biomarkers. A simple and brief questionnaire was used to pursue such purpose., Results: The feedback from CCUs was positive in 87.6% (303/346). The creatine kinase-MB is the most frequently used biomarker, however the "mass concentration" method was utilized in a minority of centers (38%). More than 60% of the CCUs are still measuring obsolete biomarkers as lactic dehydrogenase or aspartate transaminase. Cardiac troponins are measured only in 70% of the centers, and almost always in conjunction with the "old" biomarkers. Additionally, 14.5% of the Italian CCUs had written guidelines upon how to use the biomarkers to pose diagnosis of myocardial infarction. Biochemical criteria widely differed from center to center, regardless of the biomarker selected as reference standard., Conclusions: The results of our survey show a high degree of difference in the choice as well as in the application criteria of biochemical markers for diagnosing myocardial infarction among the Italian CCUs. A great deal of confusion has been accumulating over the years among Italian cardiologists, and this situation was antecedent to the recently released revised criteria for detecting myocardial necrosis.

The recent document of the ESC/ACC Committee for the redefinition of myocardial infarction (MI) has introduced the measurement of cardiac troponin as the biochemical standard for the diagnosis of MI. This change has been mainly driven by the demonstration that any amount of myocardial damage, as detected by cardiac troponins, implies a worse long-term outcome of the patient. The results of several studies consistently show that there is a continuous relationship between the degree of troponin elevation and the patient's prognosis. The new definition has important consequences on the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to patients with acute coronary syndromes; in fact, patients with increased troponins, i.e. patients with MI, necessitate more aggressive treatment than those without troponin elevations, i.e. patients with unstable angina. The application of the new definition is expected to increase the number of cases of MI by about 30% and to decrease mortality. We believe that several aspects of the new definition need to be discussed before the new criteria for MI are used in clinical practice in Italy. The most relevant issues are the following: 1) the definition of troponin elevation should meet the analytical performance of the available assays, the diagnostic cut-off of which is frequently too imprecise. We propose that troponin elevations be defined as values exceeding the concentration corresponding to a total analytical imprecision of 10%. We disclose such a concentration for the currently available assays and suggest its use in clinical practice to mitigate the possibility of false-positive values; 2) the number of samples required for the diagnosis should be sufficient for the assessment of the changes in concentration over time. When only one sample is available, or when the temporal pattern of the changes in marker concentration is not consistent with the time elapsed from the onset of symptoms, we suggest that objective evidence that myocardial ischemia is the likely cause of myocardial damage should be obtained; 3) the diagnosis of MI after a percutaneous coronary intervention represents a unique situation. In contrast with myocardial damage occurring during spontaneous ischemia, available data do not support the concept that any troponin elevation is associated with an adverse prognosis. In the absence of conclusive studies, we suggest that the diagnosis of MI after a percutaneous coronary intervention be based on conventional criteria. Finally, we propose this summary with the aim of overcoming some of the more controversial aspects of the ESC/ACC redefinition of MI: Criteria for acute, evolving or recent MI. Either one of the following criteria satisfies the diagnosis for an acute, evolving or recent MI: 1) elevation of biochemical markers of myocardial necrosis (preferably troponin) with at least one of the following: a) ischemic symptoms; b) development of pathologic Q waves on the ECG; c) ECG changes indicative of ischemia (ST segment elevation or depression); d) coronary artery intervention (e.g., coronary angioplasty). Marker elevations should be accompanied by objective evidence that myocardial ischemia is the likely cause of myocardial damage when: a) only one blood sample is available; b) marker changes over time are not consistent with the onset of symptoms; 2) pathologic findings of an acute MI. Criteria for established MI. Anyone of the following criteria satisfies the diagnosis for established MI: 1) development of new pathologic Q waves on serial ECGs. The patient may or may not remember previous symptoms. Biochemical markers of myocardial necrosis may have normalized, depending on the length of time that has passed since the infarct developed; 2) pathologic findings of a healed or healing MI.