The assessment and management of patients with type 2 myocardial infarction: an international Delphi study
Recommended Citation
Taggart C, Ferry AV, Chapman AR, Schulberg SD, Bularga A, Wereski R, Boeddinghaus J, Kimenai DM, Lowry MTH, Chew DP, Cullen L, Daniels LB, Devereaux PJ, French J, Gaggin HK, Huynh T, Jacquin L, Jaffe AS, Jernberg T, Koronowski R, McCarthy C, McCord J, Mamas MA, Mickley H, Morrow DA, Mueller C, Newby LK, Parsonage W, Raphael CE, Smer A, Smith SW, Sandoval Y, Smilowitz NR, White H, Eggers KM, Lindahl B, Thygesen K, and Mills NL. The assessment and management of patients with type 2 myocardial infarction: an international Delphi study. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes 2025.
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
9-4-2025
Publication Title
Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes
Abstract
AIMS: Type 2 myocardial infarction due to myocardial oxygen supply-demand imbalance is associated with poor outcomes. There are no guidelines to inform care for these patients. The consensus on the assessment and management of type 2 myocardial infarction is gained.
METHODS AND RESULTS: An international e-Delphi study including experts in type 2 myocardial infarction identified through systematic review was conducted. Participants were asked to describe their approach to (i) definition and diagnosis, (ii) risk stratification, (iii) assessment of coronary artery disease and cardiac function, (iv) specialty management, (v) treatment and secondary prevention, and (vi) communication and rehabilitation. Statements generated in round one were circulated, with consensus defined a priori as ≥70% agreement on a 5-point Likert scale. Where no consensus was reached, statements were amended and recirculated for a final round. The response rate was 56% (38/68), 54% (37/68), and 72% (49/68) in the first, second, and third rounds, respectively. Following the first round, 67 unique statements were generated across six domains. Overall, consensus was achieved on 64% (43/67) of statements. Consensus was achieved for 42% (5/12) of statements on the diagnosis of type 2 myocardial infarction, 75% (3/4) on risk stratification, 50% (9/18) on the assessment of coronary artery disease and cardiac function, 60% (6/10), on specialty management, 100% (9/9) on treatment and secondary prevention, and 79% (11/15) on communication and rehabilitation.
CONCLUSION: Consensus was obtained across a number of domains for the assessment and management of patients with type 2 myocardial infarction. However, there was limited agreement amongst experts on the diagnostic criteria, which may benefit from refinement.
PubMed ID
40905366
ePublication
ePub ahead of print
