4.7 Article

Effect of Definition on Incidence and Prognosis of Type 2 Myocardial Infarction

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 70, Issue 13, Pages 1558-1568

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.07.774

Keywords

diagnosis; high-sensitivity cardiac troponin; type 2 myocardial infarction

Funding

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation
  2. Swiss Heart Foundation
  3. European Union
  4. Cardiovascular Research Foundation Basel
  5. University Hospital Basel
  6. Abbott
  7. Brahms
  8. Beckman Coulter
  9. Biomerieux
  10. Roche
  11. Nanosphere
  12. Siemens
  13. 8sense
  14. Buhlmann
  15. Singulex
  16. Swiss National Science Foundation [P300PB-167803/1, PASMP3-136995]
  17. Goldschmidt-Jacobson-Foundation
  18. Professor Max Cloetta Foundation
  19. Uniscientia Foundation Vaduz
  20. University of Basel
  21. Department of Internal Medicine
  22. Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Basel
  23. KTI
  24. Stiftung fur kardiovaskulare Forschung Basel
  25. Alere
  26. AstraZeneca
  27. Sphingotec

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND Uncertainties regarding the most appropriate definition and treatment of type 2 myocardial infarction (T2MI) due to supply-demand mismatch have contributed to inconsistent adoption in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES This study sought a better understanding of the effect of the definition of T2MI on its incidence, treatment, and event-related mortality, thereby addressing an important unmet clinical need. METHODS The final diagnosis was adjudicated in patients presenting with symptoms suggestive of myocardial infarction by 2 independent cardiologists by 2 methods: 1 method required the presence of coronary artery disease, a common interpretation of the 2007 universal definition (T2MI(2007)); and 1 method did not require coronary artery disease, the 2012 universal definition (T2MI(2012)). RESULTS Overall, 4,015 consecutive patients were adjudicated. The incidence of T2MI based on the T2MI(2007) definition was 2.8% (n = 112). The application of the more liberal T2MI(2012) definition resulted in an increase of T2MI incidence of 6% (n = 240), a relative increase of 114% (128 reclassified patients, defined as T2MI(2012reclassified)). Among T2MI(2007), 6.3% of patients received coronary revascularization, 22% dual-antiplatelet therapy, and 71% high-dose statin therapy versus 0.8%, 1.6%, and 31% among T2MI(2012reclassified) patients, respectively (all p < 0.01). Cardiovascular mortality at 90 days was 0% among T2MI(2012reclassified), which was similar to patients with noncardiac causes of chest discomfort (0.2%), and lower than T2MI(2007) (3.6%) and type 1 myocardial infarction (T1MI) (4.8%) (T2MI(2012reclassified) vs. T2MI(2007) and T1MI: p = 0.03 and 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSIONS T2MI(2012reclassified) has a substantially lower event-related mortality rate compared with T2MI(2007) and T1MI. (Advantageous Predictors of Acute Coronary Syndromes Evaluation [APACE] Study; NCT00470587) (C) 2017 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

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