Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31416350›Full record

ReviewCirculation2019

Assessment and Treatment of Patients With Type 2 Myocardial Infarction and Acute Nonischemic Myocardial Injury.

Andrew P DeFilippis, Andrew R Chapman, Nicholas L Mills, James A de Lemos, Armin Arbab-Zadeh, L Kristin Newby, David A Morrow

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Circulation, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 185 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
185citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
27.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

185 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 365 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Article
  14. Type 1 and type 2 NSTEMI in atrial fibrillation: insights from the HERA-FIB registry.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2026
    Observational
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

125 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Andrew P DeFilippisDivision of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Louisville School of Medicine, KY (A.P.D.).
Andrew R ChapmanBHF/University Centre for Cardiovascular Science (A.R.C., N.L.M.), University of Edinburgh, UK.
Nicholas L MillsBHF/University Centre for Cardiovascular Science (A.R.C., N.L.M.), University of Edinburgh, UK.
James A de LemosDivision of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas (J.A.d.L.).
Armin Arbab-ZadehJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD (A.P.D., A.A.-Z.).
L Kristin NewbyDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (L.K.N.).
David A MorrowDivision of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (L.K.N.).
Duke Medical Center · USUniversity of Edinburgh · GBJohns Hopkins University · USSouthwestern Medical Center · USUniversity of Louisville · US

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/16/14/32023British Heart Foundation FS/16/75/32533
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although coronary thrombus overlying a disrupted atherosclerotic plaque has long been considered the hallmark and the primary therapeutic target for acute myocardial infarction (MI), multiple other mechanisms are now known to cause or contribute to MI. It is further recognized that an MI is just one of many types of acute myocardial injury. The Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction provides a taxonomy for acute myocardial injury, including 5 subtypes of MI and nonischemic myocardial injury. The diagnosis of MI is reserved for patients with myocardial ischemia as the cause of myocardial injury, whether attributable to acute atherothrombosis (type 1 MI) or supply/demand mismatch without acute atherothrombosis (type 2 MI). Myocardial injury in the absence of ischemia is categorized as acute or chronic nonischemic myocardial injury. However, optimal evaluation and treatment strategies for these etiologically distinct diagnoses have yet to be defined. Herein, we review the epidemiology, risk factor associations, and diagnostic tools that may assist in differentiating between nonischemic myocardial injury, type 1 MI, and type 2 MI. We identify limitations, review new research, and propose a framework for the diagnostic and therapeutic approach for patients who have suspected MI or other causes of myocardial injury.

Indexed as

Terminology as TopicClinical Decision-MakingCoronary CirculationDecision Support TechniquesDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansMyocardial InfarctionMyocardiumOxygen ConsumptionPredictive Value of TestsPrevalencePrognosisRisk Factorsheart injuriesmyocardial infarctionmyocardial ischemia

Identifiers

PMID31416350
PMCPMC6855329
OpenAlexW2968653227

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.