Why the study?
The study was designed to assess the features, treatments, and outcomes of patients with type 2 MI compared to patients with type 1 MI hospitalized in general medical wards.
Does type 2 MI compared to type 1 MI have different features, treatments, and outcomes in patients hospitalized in general medical wards?
Does type 2 MI compared to type 1 MI have different features, treatments, and outcomes in patients hospitalized in general medical wards?
Patients with type 2 MI are older, receive less guideline-directed medical therapy and coronary interventions, and have higher unadjusted 1-year mortality compared to those with type 1 MI.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Type 2 MI in general wards signals need for vigilant monitoring; leaves open whether excess risk is modifiable after comorbidity adjustment.
Type 2 myocardial infarction (MI) is defined as myocardial necrosis due to imbalance between myocardial oxygen supply and demand. The objective of this study was to assess the features, treatments, and outcomes of patients with type 2 MI in comparison with patients with type 1 MI hospitalized in general medical wards. A retrospective review was performed on patients admitted to general medicine wards diagnosed with MI in Sheba Medical Center between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2016. Comparative analysis between patients with type 1 and type 2 MI was performed. The study included 349 patients with type 1 MI and 206 patients with type 2 MI. The main provoking factors for type 2 MI were sepsis (38.1%), anemia (29.1%), and hypoxia (23.8%). Patients with type 2 MI were older (79.1 ± 11.9 vs 75.2 ± 11.7, P < .001) and had a lower rate of prior MI (23.3% vs 38.1%, P < .001) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (34% vs 48.7%, P = .023) compared with patients with type 1 MI. Patients with type 2 MI were significantly less prescribed antiplatelet therapy (79.1% vs 96%, P < .001) and statins (60.7% vs 80.2%, P < .001), and were less referred to coronary angiography (10.7% vs 54.4%, P < .001). Type 2 MI was associated with a significantly higher 1-year mortality rate compared with type 1 MI (38.8% vs 26.6%, P = .004), but after accounting for age and sex differences, this association lacked statistical significance. In conclusion, type 2 MI patients were older and had similar comorbidities compared with those with type 1 MI. These patients were less prescribed medical therapy and coronary intervention, and had a higher 1-year mortality rate. Establishing a clear therapeutic approach for type 2 MI is required.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Furie et al. (2019) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: