You can access the
full text of the document here. Following are some key points:
Any cardiac troponin
value above the upper range limit is considered myocardial injury. If
the elevation is static it is considered chronic myocardial injury.
If there's a rise or fall it is considered acute. For this to be
considered myocardial infarction there must be some additional
clinical indicator which might be based on symptoms, ECG changes or
imaging. There needs to be at least one.
The above criteria
for troponin elevation apply to MI types one through three. For types
four and five, different troponin cut offs apply. For these types of
infarction troponin elevations must be greater than 5 or greater than
10 times the upper range limit, respectively. Troponin elevations
that do not meet these cutoffs denote injury rather than infarction.
(Note that a peri-PCI MI is termed type 4a. There is also a 4b and 4c
MI and these terms refer to the more distant downstream complications
of stent thrombosis and stent restenosis, respetively).
And now for an
overview of types one through five. These categories are essentially
unchanged from the prior edition of the universal definition. Type
one MI is an acute coronary syndrome with plaque instability and
thrombus, either occlusive or nonocclusive as indicated by the
surrogates STEMI and NSTEMI respectively. Type 2 MI is not an acute
coronary syndrome. It may occur in the presence or the absence of
coronary disease. If coronary disease is present there is no plaque
instability. The infarction is caused by an unfavorable balance and
oxygen supply and demand. A couple of additional points are of note
regarding type 2 MI. First of all in general patients with type 2 MI
have a worse prognosis than those with type 1. This is due to the
presence of comorbidity and is not surprising. Among patients with
type 2 MI, those with coronary disease have a worse prognosis then
those without. Of interest, studies have shown that ST elevation in
type 2 MI occurs in between 3% and 24% of cases. In part this may be
because coronary embolism and spontaneous coronary artery dissection
(SCAD) are classified as type 2 MI. Finally it is not always
possible to differentiate between type 2 MI and non-ischemic
myocardial injury. In fact the two conditions may overlap. Type III
MI is sudden cardiac death in which acute myocardial infarction was
suspected but there was no opportunity to draw troponin levels. Type
4a is peri-PCI MI. Types 4 b and c represent the downstream
manifestations already discussed. Type 5 MI is peri-CABG MI. The
differences in troponin criteria for types four and five as opposed
to types one through three have already been discussed.
A few special points
should be made concerning perioperative ischemic events surrounding
non-cardiac surgery. The ACC/AHA guidelines on perioperative
evaluation and management for patients undergoing noncardiac surgery,
updated in 2014, give troponin testing in the perioperative period a
class I recommendation only for patients who exhibit signs or
symptoms of myocardial ischemia. Troponin testing as a means of
surveillance for patients deemed to be at high risk but without said
signs or symptoms carries only a IIb recommendation. However a
recent report and accompanying editorial published in
the March 20, 2018 issue of Circulation suggest a role for pre and
post operative troponin surveillance in selected high risk
patients. There is still no consensus regarding this.
Acute exacerbation
of heart failure is a special case. The article recommends troponin
testing in all such patients. If troponin is elevated and it is
dynamic, there should be a high index of suspicion for MI. A static
elevation may represent chronic myocardial injury as part of the
heart failure syndrome.
Takotsubo
cardiomyopathy, nowadays more appropriately referred to as stress
cardiomyopathy, is considered separately. It is distinguished from MI
of any kind. The mechanism of myocardial injury is the subject of
controversy but it's probably at least in part catecholamine mediated
injury in which case it would be nonischemic myocardial injury.
Another special situation is myocardial infarction with
nonobstructive coronary arteries. This is known as MINOCA and may
arise as a result of either type 1 or 2 MI.
What about patients
with CKD? Many of these patients who have elevated troponins have
chronic myocardial injury as a result of the CKD. Diagnosis of MI
may be difficult in this setting. It is based on changes in troponin
along with the other clinical criteria previously discussed.
Critical illness is
commonly associated with troponin elevation. Either type 1 or type 2
MI may occur. Quite often patients with critical illness experience
troponin elevation due to non-ischemic myocardial injury as an organ
manifestation of the underlying critical illness. These cases may
be difficult to distinguish from MI, especially type 2. In such
patients, whether to evaluate for coronary disease, usually after
recovery from critical illness, as a matter for clinical judgment.
The document
contains some discussion of the ECG changes of myocardial infarction.
The section makes several important points. First, when the initial
tracing is nondiagnostic in a patient having active chest pain,
serial tracings 15 to 30 minutes apart for the first couple of hours
are recommended. ST segment elevation in lead aVR is mentioned as an
important prognostic indicator and an indication of left main or
multi vessel coronary artery disease. De Winter and Wellens T waves
are described in that section, without calling them by name.
Bundle branch block
gets a very superficial discussion. Scarbossa like changes are
hinted at without using that eponym. New bundle branch block, either
right or left, is mentioned. Mention is made of electrical remodeling
(otherwise known as cardiac memory) in patients with pacemakers, in
reference to non-paced complexes.
Section 31 has a
nice discussion of normal versus pathologic Q waves and/ or QS
complexes. Section 33 discusses ST segment and T wave negativity
commonly seen in rapid atrial fibrillation and SVT. It states that
the cause is poorly understood but that the phenomenon does not
necessarily represent myocardial ischemia. It is mentioned that some
degree of anomalous ventricular activation and or electrical
remodeling may somehow explain these findings. In some cases it may
represent a type 2 MI but this should not automatically be
classified as such without additional clinical indicators.
No comments:
Post a Comment