Literature DB >> 31294615

Diagnosing type 2 myocardial infarction in clinical routine. A validation study.

Anton Gard1,2, Bertil Lindahl1,2, Gorav Batra1,2, Marcus Hjort1,2, Karolina Szummer3,4, Tomasz Baron1,2.   

Abstract

Objective. Since 2010, myocardial infarction (MI) patients reported to the Swedish registry for MI (SWEDEHEART) are routinely classified into MI subtypes. The registry has been used to study the type 2 MI population but the MI-classification in the registry has not previously been validated. The aim of this study was to validate the type 2 MI classification in the registry. Design. A total of 772 patients diagnosed with MI in 2011 and reported to the SWEDEHEART registry were included in the study. All patients were retrospectively classified into MI type 1-5 or myocardial injury by independent reviewers strictly adhering to The Third Universal Definition of MI. This gold standard classification was compared with the classification in the registry. Results. Forty-eight (6.2%) patients were classified as type 2 MI in the registry compared with 93 (12.0%) according to the gold standard classification. A type 2 MI diagnosis was confirmed in 30 out of the 48 type 2 MI patients in the registry (PPV: 62.5%). There was a moderate rate of agreement (κ: 0.43) between the gold standard classification and the classification in SWEDEHEART in deciding a type 2 MI diagnosis. Conclusion. The SWEDEHEART registry agreed moderately with the gold standard in classifying patients with type 2 MI diagnosis. Thus, studies on patients with type 2 MI in the registry should be interpreted with caution. Since the prevalence of type 2 MI is substantially underestimated in SWEDEHEART, the registry should not be used to study the prevalence of type 2 MI.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Myocardial infarction; SWEDEHEART; type 2 myocardial infarction; universal definition of myocardial infarction; validation

Year:  2019        PMID: 31294615     DOI: 10.1080/14017431.2019.1638961

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Scand Cardiovasc J        ISSN: 1401-7431            Impact factor:   1.589


  4 in total

1.  Sex differences in investigations and outcomes among patients with type 2 myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Dorien M Kimenai; Bertil Lindahl; Andrew R Chapman; Tomasz Baron; Anton Gard; Ryan Wereski; Steven J R Meex; Tomas Jernberg; Nicholas L Mills; Kai M Eggers
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2021-04-20       Impact factor: 7.365

2.  Clinical and prognostic implications of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T concentrations in type 2 non-ST elevation myocardial infarction.

Authors:  K M Eggers; T Baron; A Gard; B Lindahl
Journal:  Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc       Date:  2022-02-12

3.  Validation of myocardial infarction diagnosis in patients with congenital heart disease in Sweden.

Authors:  Maria Fedchenko; Zacharias Mandalenakis; Görel Hultsberg-Olsson; Helena Dellborg; Peter Eriksson; Mikael Dellborg
Journal:  BMC Cardiovasc Disord       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 2.298

4.  The Intersection of Type 2 Myocardial Infarction and Heart Failure.

Authors:  Cian P McCarthy; Maeve Jones-O'Connor; David S Olshan; Sean Murphy; Saad Rehman; Joshua A Cohen; Jinghan Cui; Avinainder Singh; Muthiah Vaduganathan; James L Januzzi; Jason H Wasfy
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2021-08-21       Impact factor: 5.501

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.