Skip to main content

Main menu

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers

User menu

  • Alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open
  • RCGP
    • British Journal of General Practice
    • BJGP for RCGP members
    • RCGP eLearning
    • InnovAIT Journal
    • Jobs and careers
  • Subscriptions
  • Alerts
  • Log in
  • Follow BJGP Open on Instagram
  • Visit bjgp open on Bluesky
  • Blog
Intended for Healthcare Professionals
BJGP Open

Advanced Search

  • HOME
  • LATEST ARTICLES
  • ALL ISSUES
  • AUTHORS & REVIEWERS
  • RESOURCES
    • About BJGP Open
    • BJGP Open Accessibility Statement
    • Editorial Board
    • Editorial Fellowships
    • Audio Abstracts
    • eLetters
    • Alerts
    • BJGP Life
    • Research into Publication Science
    • Advertising
    • Contact
  • SPECIAL ISSUES
    • Social Care Integration with Primary Care: call for articles
    • Special issue: Telehealth
    • Special issue: Race and Racism in Primary Care
    • Special issue: COVID-19 and Primary Care
    • Past research calls
    • Top 10 Research Articles of the Year
  • BJGP CONFERENCE →
Research

Evaluating possible acute coronary syndrome in primary care: the value of signs, symptoms, and plasma heart-type fatty acid-binding protein (H-FABP). A diagnostic study

Robert TA Willemsen, Bjorn Winkens, Bas LJH Kietselaer, Agnieszka Smolinska, Frank Buntinx, Jan FC Glatz and Geert-Jan Dinant
BJGP Open 2019; 3 (3): bjgpopen19X101652. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgpopen19X101652
Robert TA Willemsen
1 General Practitioner, PhD, Department of Family Medicine, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
MD, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: robert.willemsen{at}maastrichtuniversity.nl
Bjorn Winkens
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Methodology and Statistics, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bas LJH Kietselaer
3 Cardiologist, Department of Cardiology, Zuyderland Hospital, Heerlen, the Netherlands
MD, PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Agnieszka Smolinska
4 Assistant Professor, Department of Pharmacology & Toxicology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Frank Buntinx
5 Professor, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Catholic University Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
6 Professor, Department of Family Medicine, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jan FC Glatz
7 Professor, Department of Genetics & Cell Biology, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Geert-Jan Dinant
8 Professor, Department of Family Medicine, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1. Study flow chart showing inclusion and exclusion criteria, and eligible participants with numbers of main outcome (ACS).

    ACS = acute coronary syndrome. H-FABP= heart-type fatty acid-binding protein. POC = point of care.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2. Classification tree for acute coronary syndrome.

    ACS = acute coronary syndrome.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1. Patient and population characteristics of study population (n = 303)
    Variablen (%)Remarks
    SexMale148 (48.8)–
    Female155 (51.2)
    Age, years≤3015 (5.0) Mean age, years (range): 58.3 (17–100)
    31–4025 (8.3)
    41–5047 (15.5)
    51–6078 (25.7)
    61–7074 (24.4)
    71–8043 (14.2)
    >8021 (6.9)
    Type of contact(missing data n = 1)Consultation, daytime, own GP139 (46.0)  150 patients (49.7%) seen by their own GP during office hours, 152 patients (50.3%) seen by GP on call at OOH service
    Home visit, daytime, own GP11 (3.6)
    Consultation, OOH service146 (48.3)
    Home visit, OOH service6 (2.0)
    HistoryNo DM2 or prior CVD179 (59.1)–
    DM222 (7.3)
    Prior CVD90 (29.7)
    DM2 and prior CVD12 (4.0)
    Duration of complaints at presentation, hours(missing data n = 6)0–132 (10.8)  –
    2–383 (27.9)
    4–662 (20.9)
    7–1252 (17.5)
    13–2468 (22.9)
    eGFR, ml/min(missing data n = 49) ≤303 (1.2)–
     31–6042 (16.5)
     >6009 (82.3)
    ECG performed(missing data n = 1) No50 (16.6)–
     Yes, no abnormalities152 (50.3)
     Yes, with abnormalities100 (33.1)
    Referral policy No referral167 (55.1)  Overall referral percentage: 44.9% Overall direct referral percentage: 37.0% Overall referral percentage at later time: 7.9%
     Direct referral on presentation to cardiologist107 (35.3)
     Direct referral on presentation, other5 (1.7)
     Referral at later time during follow-up, cardiologist20 (6.6)
     Referral at later time during follow-up, other4 (1.3)
    Troponin available Troponin available (all patients)267 (88.1) 
     Troponin available (non-referred patients)171 (87.2) 
      Troponin available (referred patients)96 (89.7) 
    • CVD = cardiovascular disease. DM2 = type 2 diabetes mellitus. ECG = electrocardiogram. eGFR = estimated glomerular filtration rate. OOH service = out-of-hours service.

    • View popup
    Table 2. Diagnostic parameters of POC H-FABP as a stand-alone test
    Outcome: ACS or other life-threatening diseaseOutcome: ACSOutcome: AMIOutcome: NSTEMI
    Interval, onset complaints to presentation, hours 0– 24 0– 3 3– 24 0– 24 0– 3 3– 24 0– 24 0– 3 3– 24 0– 24 0– 3 3– 24
    Patients, n 291a 106b 179b 291a 106b 179b 291a 106b 179b 291a 106b 179b
    Sens H-FABP POCT, % (95% CI)25.7 (13.1 to 43.6)8.3 (0.44 to 40.2)36.4 (18.0 to 59.2)25.8 (12.5 to 44.9)9.1 (4.8 to 42.9)36.8 (17.2 to 61.4)26.9 (12.4 to 48.1)10.0 (0.52 to 45.9)40.0 (17.5 to 67.1)18.9 (5.0 to 46.3)0 (0 to48.3)33.3 (9.0 to 69.1)
    Spec H-FABP POCT (95% CI)97.3 (94.2 to 98.8)98.9 (93.4 to 99.9)96.2 (91.5 to 98.4)96.9 (93.8 to 98.6)98.9 (93.4 to 99.9)95.6 (90.8 to 98.1)96.6 (93.4 to 98.3)99.0 (93.5 to 99.9)95.1 (90.3 to 97.7)95.3 (91.9 to 97.4)98.0 (92.3 to 99.7)93.5 (88.4 to 96.6)
    NPV H-FABP POCT, % (95% CI)90.5 (86.3 to 93.6)9.4 (81.5 to 94.3)91.5 (85.9 to 95.1)1.6 (87.6 to 94.5)90.4 (82.6 to 95.0)92.7 (87.4 to 96.0)93.1 (89.2 to 95.7)91.3 (83.8 to 95.7)94.5 (89.6 to 97.3)95.3 (91.9 to 97.4)94.2 (87.4 to 97.6)96.4 (91.9 to 98.5)
    PPV H-FABP PoCT, % (95% CI)56.3 (30.6 to 79.2)50.0 (26.7 to 97.3)57.1 (29.6 to 81.2)50.0 (25.5 to 74.5)50.0 (26.7 to 97.3)50.0 (24.0 to 76.0)43.8 (20.8 to 69.4)50.0 (26.7 to 97.3)42.9 (18.8 to 70.4)18.9 (5.0 to 46.3)0 (0 to 80.2)21.4 (5.7 to 51.2)
    • Sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values of POC H-FABP for all patients, patients presenting within 3 hours of onset of complaints, and patients presenting 3–24 hours after onset of complaints for several outcomes, namely: (1) life-threatening disease (that is, composite of acute heart failure, pulmonary embolism, aortic dissection, acute death, ACS); (2) ACS (that is, UA, NSTEMI, STEMI); (3) AMI (that is, NSTEMI and STEMI); and (4) NSTEMI only.

    • a12 test failures among 303 included patients.

    • b In six cases, patients presented within 24 hours after onset of complaints; however, registration of duration of complaints was incomplete. These patients are not included in the tables representing subgroups of patients presenting with chest pain within 3 hours or 3–24 hours after onset of complaints.

    • ACS = acute coronary syndrome. AMI = acute myocardial infarction. CI = confidence intervals. H-FABP = heart-type fatty acid-binding protein. NPV = negative predictive value. NSTEMI = non-ST elevated myocardial infarction. POC = point of care. PPV = positive predictive value. Sens = sensitivity. Spec = specificity. STEMI = ST-elevated myocardial infarction. UA = unstable angina.

    • View popup
    Table 3. Sensitivity and specificity of possible clinical decision rules based on multivariable analyses of the study data (total patients with chest pain analysed, n = 303; total patients with ACS, n = 32 [10.6%]; total patients with AMI, n = 27 (8.9%])
    Clinical judgment GP CDR variant 1 CDR variant 2 CDR variant 3 CDR variant 4 CDR variant 5 a,c
    CDR based on…ST-depressions/11///
    ST-elevations/11///
    Dyspnoea/1111/
    Feeling of pressure chest/1111/
    Absent lateral chest pain left/1111–
    Age ≤45.5, ≥68.5 years//////
    Male sex//////
    Cardiac murmur//////
    POCT H-FABP result positive/1/1//
    CDR and/or decision characteristicsMaximum score/6543/
    Considered negative if…GP did not refer≤1≤1≤1≤1/
    Patients with a negative versus positive score191 negative, 112 positive145 negative, 158 positive147 negative, 156 positive157 negative, 146 positive161 negative, 142 positive46 negative, 204 positive
    Rule-out characteristicsSens; NPV for ACS [95% CI]Sens 75.0 [56.2 to 87.9]; NPV 95.8 [91.6 to 98.0]Sens 87.5 [70.1 to 95.9]; NPV 97.2 [92.6 to 99.1]Sens 81.2 [63.0 to 92.1]; NPV 95.9 [90.9 to 98.3]Sens 78.1 [60.0 to 90.0]; NPV 95.5 [90.7 to 98.0]Sens 68.8 [49.9 to 83.3]; NPV 93.8 [88.6 to 96.8]Sens 100 [84.5 to 100]; NPV 100 [90.4 to 100]
    FNs for ACS, n (% of total)8 (2.6)4 (1.3)6 (2.0)7 (2.3)10 (3.3)0 (0.0)
    TNs for ACS, n (% of total)183 (60.4)141 (46.5)141 (46.5)150 (49.5)151 (49.8)46 (18.4)
    Sens; NPV for AMI [95% CI]Sens 70.4 [49.7 to 85.5]; NPV 95.8 [91.6 to 98.0]Sens 88.9 [69.7 to 97.1]; NPV 97.9 [93.6 to 99.5]Sens 81.5 [61.3 to 93.0]; NPV 96.6 [91.8 to 98.7]Sens 77.8 [57.3 to 90.6]; NPV 96.2 [91.5 to 98.4]Sens 66.7 [46.0 to 82.8]; NPV 94.4 [89.3 to 97.2]Sens 81.5 [61.3 to 93.0]; NPV 0 [0 to 53.7]
    Rule-in characteristicsSpec; PPV for ACS [95% CI]Spec 67.5 [61.6 to 73.0]; PPV 21.4 [14.5 to 30.4]Spec 52.0 [45.9 to 58.1]; PPV 17.7 [12.3 to 24.8]Spec 52.0 [45.9 to 58.1]; PPV 16.7 [11.4 to 23.7]Spec 55.4 [49.2 to 61.3]; PPV 17.1 [11.6 to 24.4]Spec 55.7 [49.6 to 61.7]; PPV 15.5 [10.2 to 22.7]Spec 20.6 [15.6 to 26.7]; PPV 13.2 [9.1 to 18.8]
    FPs for ACS, n (% of total)88 (29.0)130 (42.9)130 (42.9)121 (39.9)120 (39.6)177 (70.8)
    TPs for ACS, n (% of total)24 (7.9)28 (9.2)26 (8.6)25 (8.3)22 (7.3)27 (10.8)
    Spec; PPV for AMI [95% CI]Spec 66.3 [60.4 to 71.8]; PPV 17.0 [10.8 to 25.5]Spec 51.4 [45.4 to 57.5]; PPV 15.2 [10.2 to 22.0]Spec 51.4 [45.4 to 57.5]; PPV 14.1 [9.2 to 20.8]Spec 54.7 (48.6 to 60.7]; PPV 14.4 [9.3 to 21.4]Spec 55.1 (49.0 to 61.0]; PPV 12.7 [7.9 to 19.6]Spec 0.0 (0.0 to 2.1]; PPV 9.0 [5.8 to 13.5]
    Rule in or outb Rule in, out ACS. Rule in, out AMIRule in, out ACS. Rule in, out AMIRule in, out ACS. Rule in, out AMIRule in, out ACS. Rule in, out AMINon-decisiveRule out ACS
    • aDenominator in calculations for CDR variant 5 is 250 patients, since CART was initially performed in a subgroup of 53 patients and internally validated in a subgroup of the remaining 250 patients.

    • bA CDR is considered as possibly relevant for rule in when the pre-test probability (based on the prevalence in the study population) of presence of an AMI (8.9%), or ACS (10.6%), is below the lower margin of the 95% CI of the PPV of the CDR. A CDR is considered as potentially relevant for rule-out when the pre-test probability of absence of an AMI (91.1%), or ACS (89.4%), is below the lower margin of the 95% CI of the NPV.

    • cIn addition to the predicting signs and symptoms derived from CART for ACS, two other symptoms were added to CDR variant 5 for AMI: systolic blood pressure ≥149 mmHg and bradycardia (heart rate <60/min), based on the CART analysis with AMI as an outcome.

    • ACS = acute coronary syndrome. AMI = acute myocardial infarction. CI = confidence interval. FNs = false negatives. FPs = false positives. H-FABP = heart-type fatty acid-binding protein. NPV = negative predictive value. NSTEMI = non-ST elevated myocardial infarction. POCT = point of care test. PPV = positive predictive value. Sens = sensitivity. Spec = specificity. SBP = systolic blood pressure. TNs = true negatives. TPs = true positives.

Back to top
Previous ArticleNext Article

In this issue

BJGP Open
Vol. 3, Issue 3
October 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Download PDF
Download PowerPoint
Email Article

Thank you for recommending BJGP Open.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person to whom you are recommending the page knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Evaluating possible acute coronary syndrome in primary care: the value of signs, symptoms, and plasma heart-type fatty acid-binding protein (H-FABP). A diagnostic study
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from BJGP Open
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from BJGP Open.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Evaluating possible acute coronary syndrome in primary care: the value of signs, symptoms, and plasma heart-type fatty acid-binding protein (H-FABP). A diagnostic study
Robert TA Willemsen, Bjorn Winkens, Bas LJH Kietselaer, Agnieszka Smolinska, Frank Buntinx, Jan FC Glatz, Geert-Jan Dinant
BJGP Open 2019; 3 (3): bjgpopen19X101652. DOI: 10.3399/bjgpopen19X101652

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Evaluating possible acute coronary syndrome in primary care: the value of signs, symptoms, and plasma heart-type fatty acid-binding protein (H-FABP). A diagnostic study
Robert TA Willemsen, Bjorn Winkens, Bas LJH Kietselaer, Agnieszka Smolinska, Frank Buntinx, Jan FC Glatz, Geert-Jan Dinant
BJGP Open 2019; 3 (3): bjgpopen19X101652. DOI: 10.3399/bjgpopen19X101652
del.icio.us logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo Bluesky logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • LinkedIn logo LinkedIn
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley
  • Bluesky logo Bluesky

Jump to section

  • Top
  • Article
    • Abstract
    • How this fits in
    • Introduction
    • Method
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Notes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info
  • eLetters
  • PDF

Keywords

  • primary health care
  • chest pain
  • acute coronary syndrome
  • Early diagnosis
  • point-of-care testing
  • biomarkers

More in this TOC Section

  • Slow walking speed and risk of cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review
  • Experiences of dyslexia in GP training in the UK: a qualitative study
  • Acceptability and utility of parental guidance on weight talk with children for GPs: a qualitative study
Show more Research

Related Articles

Cited By...

Intended for Healthcare Professionals

 
 

British Journal of General Practice

NAVIGATE

  • Home
  • Latest articles
  • Authors & reviewers
  • Accessibility statement

RCGP

  • British Journal of General Practice
  • BJGP for RCGP members
  • RCGP eLearning
  • InnovAiT Journal
  • Jobs and careers

MY ACCOUNT

  • RCGP members' login
  • Terms and conditions

NEWS AND UPDATES

  • About BJGP Open
  • Alerts
  • RSS feeds
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

AUTHORS & REVIEWERS

  • Submit an article
  • Writing for BJGP Open: research
  • Writing for BJGP Open: practice & policy
  • BJGP Open editorial process & policies
  • BJGP Open ethical guidelines
  • Peer review for BJGP Open

CUSTOMER SERVICES

  • Advertising
  • Open access licence

CONTRIBUTE

  • BJGP Life
  • eLetters
  • Feedback

CONTACT US

BJGP Open Journal Office
RCGP
30 Euston Square
London NW1 2FB
Tel: +44 (0)20 3188 7400
Email: bjgpopen@rcgp.org.uk

BJGP Open is an editorially-independent publication of the Royal College of General Practitioners

© 2026 BJGP Open

Online ISSN: 2398-3795