Higher non-cardiac mortality and lesser impact of early revascularization in patients with type 2 compared to type 1 acute myocardial infarction: results from the Tokyo CCU Network registry
- 19 Downloads
As the definition of type 2 acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is obscure, the characteristics of this disease vary among studies. The clinical significance of type 2 AMI is unclear. We surveyed the Tokyo Cardiovascular Care Unit (CCU) Network registry between 2010 and 2014. The difference in clinical characteristics and the impact of revascularization in patients with type 1 and type 2 AMI were evaluated. The cohort study included 12514 patients admitted to CCU (type 1 AMI, 12023; type 2 AMI, 491; mean age, 68 ± 15 years; 75% male). Coronary angiography was performed in 11402 patients (95%) with type 1 AMI and 427 (87%) with type 2 AMI (p < 0.001). Type 2 AMI was associated with higher in-hospital mortality (type 1 AMI, 769 (6.4%); type 2 AMI, 54 (11.0%); adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.64; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12–2.41; p = 0.011) and higher non-cardiac mortality (adjusted OR 2.19; 95% CI 1.33–3.62; p = 0.002), but similar cardiac mortality rate compared to type 1 AMI (adjusted OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.71–1.91; p = 0.539). Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within 24 h after the onset was associated with lower in-hospital mortality in those with type 1 AMI (OR 0.47; 95% CI 0.40–0.55; p < 0.001), but not in those with type 2 AMI (OR 1.09; 95% CI 0.62–1.94; p = 0.763). The results persisted after adjustment for multivariate logistic regression analysis and inverted probability weighting. In conclusion, patients with type 2 AMI had higher in-hospital mortality owing to higher non-cardiac death. More refined definitions focusing on the treatment of comorbidities may be required, as the treatment strategy for type 2 AMI can be different from that for type 1 AMI.
KeywordsType 2 AMI Acute myocardial infarction Universal definition of myocardial infarction Non-cardiac mortality Percutaneous coronary intervention
Financial support for this study was provided by the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, and JSPS KAKENHI Grant number 17K18085 [S.H.]. We thank all the cardiologists and staff participating in the Tokyo CCU Network and Ms. Nobuko Yoshida (Tokyo CCU Network office) for data acquisition.
Compliance withe ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors report no conflicts of interest.
- 1.Thygesen K, Alpert JS, White HD, Jaffe AS, Apple FS, Galvani M, Katus HA, Newby LK, Ravkilde J, Chaitman B, Clemmensen PM, Dellborg M, Hod H, Porela P, Underwood R, Bax JJ, Beller GA, Bonow R, Van der Wall EE, Bassand JP, Wijns W, Ferguson TB, Steg PG, Uretsky BF, Williams DO, Armstrong PW, Antman EM, Fox KA, Hamm CW, Ohman EM, Simoons ML, Poole-Wilson PA, Gurfinkel EP, Lopez-Sendon JL, Pais P, Mendis S, Zhu JR, Wallentin LC, Fernandez-Aviles F, Fox KM, Parkhomenko AN, Priori SG, Tendera M, Voipio-Pulkki LM, Vahanian A, Camm AJ, De Caterina R, Dean V, Dickstein K, Filippatos G, Funck-Brentano C, Hellemans I, Kristensen SD, McGregor K, Sechtem U, Silber S, Widimsky P, Zamorano JL, Morais J, Brener S, Harrington R, Morrow D, Lim M, Martinez-Rios MA, Steinhubl S, Levine GN, Gibler WB, Goff D, Tubaro M, Dudek D, Al-Attar N (2007) Universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation 116:2634–2653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Roffi M, Radovanovic D, Iglesias JF, Eberli FR, Urban P, Pedrazzini GB, Erne P, Rickli H (2018) Multisite vascular disease in acute coronary syndromes: increased in-hospital mortality and no improvement over time. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. https://doi.org/10.1177/2048872618814708 Google Scholar
- 11.Lopez-Cuenca A, Gomez-Molina M, Flores-Blanco PJ, Sanchez-Martinez M, Garcia-Narbon A, De Las Heras-Gomez I, Sanchez-Galian MJ, Guerrero-Perez E, Valdes M, Manzano-Fernandez S (2016) Comparison between type-2 and type-1 myocardial infarction: clinical features, treatment strategies and outcomes. J Geriatr Cardiol 13:15–22Google Scholar
- 22.Nestelberger T, Boeddinghaus J, Badertscher P, Twerenbold R, Wildi K, Breitenbucher D, Sabti Z, Puelacher C, Rubini Gimenez M, Kozhuharov N, Strebel I, Sazgary L, Schneider D, Jann J, du Fay de Lavallaz J, Miro O, Martin-Sanchez FJ, Morawiec B, Kawecki D, Muzyk P, Keller DI, Geigy N, Osswald S, Reichlin T, Mueller C (2017) Effect of definition on incidence and prognosis of type 2 myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 70:1558–1568CrossRefGoogle Scholar