Recommended Citation
Horiuchi Y, Wettersten N, Patel MP, Mueller C, Neath S, Christenson RH, Morgenthaler NG, McCord J, Nowak RM, Vilke GM, Daniels LB, Hollander JE, Apple FS, Cannon CM, Nagurney JT, Schreiber D, deFilippi C, Hogan C, Diercks DB, Headden G, Limkakeng AT, Anand I, Wu AH, Ebmeyer S, Jaffe AS, Peacock W, Maisel AS. Biomarkers Enhance Discrimination and Prognosis of Type 2 Myocardial Infarction. Circulation 2020; .
Document Type
Article
Publication Date
8-21-2020
Publication Title
Circulation
Abstract
Background: The observed incidence of type 2 myocardial infarction (T2MI) is expected to increase with the implementation of increasingly sensitive cardiac troponin (cTn) assays. However, it remains to be determined how to diagnose, risk stratify and treat patients with T2MI. We aimed to discriminate and risk-stratify T2MI using biomarkers.
Methods: Patients presenting to the Emergency Department with chest pain, enrolled in the CHOPIN study, were retrospectively analyzed. Two cardiologists adjudicated type 1 MI (T1MI) and T2MI. The prognostic ability of several biomarkers alone or in combination to discriminate T2MI from T1MI was investigated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The biomarkers analyzed were cTnI, copeptin, mid-regional pro-atrial natriuretic peptide (MRproANP), C-terminal pro-endothelin-1 (CT-proET1), mid-regional pro-adrenomedullin (MRproADM) and procalcitonin. Prognostic utility of these biomarkers for all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE: a composite of acute MI, unstable angina pectoris, reinfarction, heart failure, and stroke) at 180-day follow-up was also investigated.
Results: Among the 2071 patients, T1MI and T2MI were adjudicated in 94 and 176 patients, respectively. Patients with T1MI had higher levels of baseline cTnI, while those with T2MI had higher baseline levels of MR-proANP, CT-proET1, MR-proADM, and procalcitonin. The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for the diagnosis of T2MI was higher for CT-proET1, MRproADM and MR-proANP (0.765, 0.750, and 0.733, respectively) than for cTnI (0.631). Combining all biomarkers resulted in a similar accuracy to a model using clinical variables and cTnI (0.854 versus 0.884, p = 0.294). Addition of biomarkers to the clinical model yielded the highest AUC (0.917). Other biomarkers, but not cTnI, were associated with mortality and MACE at 180-day among all patients, with no interaction between the diagnosis of T1MI or T2MI.
Conclusions: Assessment of biomarkers reflecting pathophysiologic processes occurring with T2MI might help differentiate it from T1MI. Additionally, all biomarkers measured, except cTnI, were significant predictors of prognosis, regardless of type of MI.
PubMed ID
32820656
ePublication
ePub ahead of print
