4.7 Article

Patient Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes of Type 1 Versus Type 2 Myocardial Infarction

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 77, Issue 7, Pages 848-857

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.12.034

Keywords

type 2 myocardial infarction; Nationwide Readmissions Database; outcomes

Funding

  1. KL2/Catalyst Medical Research Investigator Training award from Harvard Catalyst (National Institutes of Health/National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences Award) [UL 1TR002541]
  2. Amgen
  3. Galmed
  4. Novartis
  5. NIH
  6. American Heart Association [18 CDA 34110215]
  7. Hutter Family Professorship
  8. Novartis Pharmaceuticals
  9. Innolife
  10. Applied Therapeutics
  11. Abbott Diagnostics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that patients with type 2 MI, compared to those with type 1 MI, were older, had a higher proportion of women, and had higher prevalence of heart failure, kidney disease, and atrial fibrillation. Patients with type 2 MI had lower rates of coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention, and coronary artery bypass grafting, but also lower risks of in-hospital mortality and 30-day MI readmission.
BACKGROUND Type 2 myocardial infarction (MI) patients may have different characteristics and outcomes when compared with type 1 MI. OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to compare patients with type 1 MI to those with type 2 MI in the United States. METHODS Using the Nationwide Readmissions Database, MI patients were categorized over the 3 months following the introduction of an International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision code specific for type 2 MI. Baseline characteristics and inpatient and post-discharge outcomes among both cohorts were compared. RESULTS There were 216,657 patients with type 1 MI, 37,765 patients with type 2 MI, and 1,525 patients with both type 1 and 2 MI. Patients with type 2 MI were older (71 years vs. 69 years; p < 0.001), were more likely to be women (47.3% vs. 40%; p < 0.001), and had higher prevalence of heart failure (27.9% vs. 10.9%; p < 0.001), kidney disease (35.7% vs. 25.7%; p < 0.001), and atrial fibrillation (31% vs. 21%; p < 0.001). Rates of coronary angiography (10.9% vs. 57.3%; p < 0.001), percutaneous coronary intervention (1.7% vs. 38.5%; p < 0.001), and coronary artery bypass grafting (0.4% vs. 7.8%; p < 0.001) were lower among type 2 MI patients. Patients with type 2 MI had lower risk of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio: 0.57 [95% confidence interval: 0.54 to 0.60]) and 30-day MI readmission (adjusted odds ratio: 0.46 [95% confidence interval: 0.35 to 0.59]). There was no difference in risk of 30-day all-cause or heart failure readmission. CONCLUSIONS Patients with type 2 MI have a unique cardiovascular phenotype when compared with type 1 MI, and are managed in a heterogenous manner. Validated management strategies for type 2 MI are needed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available