Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

A new clinical classification of acute myocardial infarction

Nature Medicine volume 29, pages 2200–2205 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The existence of a universal definition of myocardial infarction—which involves classification into multiple subtypes—has promoted the use of standard diagnostic criteria across the world. However, this classification has not been applied consistently in practice and is perceived by some as too complicated. Where there is diagnostic uncertainty, patients have worse outcomes. This uncertainty has also impacted on the validity of the diagnosis of myocardial infarction in clinical trials. To address these issues and to encourage clinicians to recognize that different mechanisms of myocardial infarction have differing treatment implications, we propose an alternative clinical classification for consideration; one that recognizes that myocardial infarction can arise spontaneously, secondary to another condition, or as a complication of a cardiac procedure. This classification is aligned with clinical practice and proposes more objective and specific diagnostic criteria that, if agreed by international consensus, could reduce diagnostic uncertainty in practice and research.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Proposal for a clinical classification of acute myocardial infarction.

References

  1. The Joint European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology Committee. Myocardial infarction redefined—a consensus document of The Joint European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology Committee for the redefinition of myocardial infarction. Eur. Heart J. 21, 1502–1513 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Thygesen, K. et al. Universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation 116, 2634–2653 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Thygesen, K. et al. Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation 126, 2020–2035 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Thygesen, K. et al. Fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation 138, e618–e651 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gard, A. et al. Diagnosing type 2 myocardial infarction in clinical routine. A validation study. Scand. Cardiovasc. J. 53, 259–265 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gregson, J. et al. Implications of alternative definitions of peri-procedural myocardial infarction after coronary revascularization. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 76, 1609–1621 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Neumann, J. T. et al. Discrimination of patients with type 2 myocardial infarction. Eur. Heart J. 38, 3514–3520 (2017).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chapman, A. R. et al. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin and the universal definition of myocardial infarction. Circulation 141, 161–171 (2020).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hammarsten, O., Mair, J., Möckel, M., Lindahl, B. & Jaffe, A. S. Possible mechanisms behind cardiac troponin elevations. Biomarkers 23, 725–734 (2018).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Árnadóttir, A. et al. Temporal release of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T and I and copeptin after brief induced coronary artery balloon occlusion in humans. Circulation 143, 1095–1104 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Shah, A. S. et al. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin I at presentation in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome: a cohort study. Lancet 386, 2481–2488 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Devereaux, P. J. et al. High-sensitivity troponin I after cardiac surgery and 30-day mortality. N. Engl. J. Med. 386, 827–836 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hinton, J. et al. Incidence and 1-year outcome of periprocedural myocardial infarction following cardiac surgery: are the Universal Definition and Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention criteria fit for purpose? Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 62, ezac019 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zeitouni, M. et al. Periprocedural myocardial infarction and injury in elective coronary stenting. Eur. Heart J. 39, 1100–1109 (2018).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Saaby, L. et al. Classification of myocardial infarction: frequency and features of type 2 myocardial infarction. Am. J. Med. 126, 789–797 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. McCarthy, C. P. et al. Patient characteristics and clinical outcomes of type 1 versus type 2 myocardial infarction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 77, 848–857 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Eggers, K. M., Baron, T., Chapman, A. R., Gard, A. & Lindahl, B. Management and outcome trends in type 2 myocardial infarction: an investigation from the SWEDEHEART registry. Sci. Rep. 13, 7194 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Bularga, A. et al. Coronary artery and cardiac disease in patients with type 2 myocardial infarction: a prospective cohort study. Circulation 145, 1188–1200 (2022).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Herrick, J. B. Certain clinical features of sudden obstruction of the coronary arteries. JAMA 59, 2015–2020 (1912).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Chapman, A. R. et al. Long-term outcomes in patients with type 2 myocardial infarction and myocardial injury. Circulation 137, 1236–1245 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Sepehrvand, N. et al. Alignment of site versus adjudication committee-based diagnosis with patient outcomes: insights from the providing rapid out of hospital acute cardiovascular treatment 3 trial. Clin. Trials 13, 140–148 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gard, A., Lindahl, B. & Baron, T. Impact of clinical diagnosis of myocardial infarction in patients with elevated cardiac troponin. Heart https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2022-322298 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. DeFilippis, A. P. et al. Assessment and treatment of patients with type 2 myocardial infarction and acute nonischemic myocardial injury. Circulation 140, 1661–1678 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Mueller, C. et al. Multicenter evaluation of a 0-hour/1-hour algorithm in the diagnosis of myocardial infarction with high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T. Ann. Emerg. Med. 68, 76–87 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Ljung, L. et al. A rule-out strategy based on high-sensitivity troponin and HEART score reduces hospital admissions. Ann. Emerg. Med. 73, 491–499 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Anand, A. et al. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin on presentation to rule out myocardial infarction: a stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled trial. Circulation 143, 2214–2224 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Doudesis, D. et al. Machine learning for diagnosis of myocardial infarction using cardiac troponin concentrations. Nat. Med. 29, 1201–1210 (2023).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Spitzer, E. et al. Critical appraisal of contemporary clinical endpoint definitions in coronary intervention trials: a guidance document. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 12, 805–819 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. de Lemos, J. A., Newby, L. K. & Mills, N. L. A proposal for modest revision of the definition of type 1 and type 2 myocardial infarction. Circulation 140, 1773–1775 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Lee, K. K. et al. Prevalence, determinants and clinical associations of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin in patients attending emergency departments. Am. J. Med. 132, 110.e8–110.e21 (2019).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Baron, T. et al. Impact on long-term mortality of presence of obstructive coronary artery disease and classification of myocardial infarction. Am. J. Med. 129, 398–406 (2016).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Garcia-Garcia, H. M. et al. Standardized end point definitions for coronary intervention trials: The Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document. Circulation 137, 2635–2650 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

B.L. was a member of the Task Force for the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. N.L.M. is supported by a Chair Award (CH/F/21/90010), Programme Grant (RG/20/10/34966) and a Research Excellent Award (RE/18/5/34216) from the British Heart Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Medical Sciences, University of Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden

    Bertil Lindahl

  2. BHF Centre for Cardiovascular Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

    Bertil Lindahl & Nicholas L. Mills

  3. Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

    Nicholas L. Mills

Authors
  1. Bertil Lindahl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicholas L. Mills
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

B.L. and N.L.M. drafted and revised the manuscript critically for important intellectual content, provided approval of the final version to be published and are accountable for the work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicholas L. Mills.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

B.L. declares no competing interests. N.L.M. reports research grants awarded to the University of Edinburgh from Abbott Diagnostics and Siemens Healthineers, and honoraria from Abbott Diagnostics, Siemens Healthineers, Roche Diagnostics and LumiraDx.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Medicine thanks Adnan Kastrati and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Primary Handling Editor: Karen O’Leary, in collaboration with the Nature Medicine team.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lindahl, B., Mills, N.L. A new clinical classification of acute myocardial infarction. Nat Med 29, 2200–2205 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-023-02513-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-023-02513-2

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing