Over-diagnosing MI is not* as negligent as missing it!

As the medical literature expands exponentially, the quality and intent of the research questions sound awry. There are only a handful of journals like JAMA that are bold enough to ask some tough and pragmatic questions in this glitzy world of medical extravaganza. The current issue wants to set the pace for an important debate, on a topic that is rarely discussed. The question is Link to the article Check whether your answers concur with this crucial query from Harvard Medical School and Massachusetts General Hospital. Three questions this article wishes to address. 1.What is the reason it is happening? 2. What are the implications? 3. What can be done for it? My thoughts “It is indeed overdiagnosed. Once labeled, a chain reaction is set in. The cost, and resource consumption that follow a misdiagnosis are nearly identical to that of a true MI. More than that, the adversities of the tense investigative protocol can convert a misdiagnosis into a real one because that sadly includes even an overzealous poking right at the mouth of the coronary artery just o exclude a non existing MI . and ICU-related anxiety stand apart in this scientific comical game of ruling out a cardiac emergency. The paper seems to blame mostly on the powerful screening test high sensitivity Troponin, Everyone will agree it has a major role in this. But, the more important reason is the cardiology community’s vigorous adoption of a universal definition of M...
Source: Dr.S.Venkatesan MD - Category: Cardiology Authors: Tags: Uncategorized acc aha esc guidlines dilemma in cardiology drsvenkatesan ethics in medicine high senstivity troponins jama network nstemi pci Source Type: blogs