Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
ImportanceDistinguishing type 2 (T2MI) from type 1 myocardial infarction (T1MI) in clinical practice can be difficult, and the management and prognosis for T2MI remain uncertain.ObjectiveTo compare precipitating factors, risk factors, investigations, management and outcomes for T2MI and T1MI.Data sourcesMedline and Embase databases as well as reference list of recent articles were searched January 2009 to December 2020 for term ‘type 2 myocardial infarction’.Study selectionStudies were included if they used a universal definition of MI and reported quantitative data on at least one variable of interest.Data extraction and synthesisData were pooled using random-effect meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment tool. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were followed. All review stages were conducted by two reviewers.Main outcomes and measuresRisk factors, presenting symptoms, cardiac investigations such as troponin and angiogram, management and outcomes such as mortality.Results40 cohort studies comprising 98 930 patients with T1MI and 13 803 patients with T2MI were included. Compared with T1MI, patients with T2MI were: more likely to have pre-existing chronic kidney disease (OR 1.87; 95% CI 1.53 to 2.28) and chronic heart failure (OR 2.35; 95% CI 1.82 to 3.03), less likely to present with typical cardiac symptoms of chest pain (OR 0.19; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.26) and more likely to present with dyspnoea (OR 2.64; 95% CI 1.86 to 3.74); more likely to demonstrate non-specific ST-T wave changes on ECG (OR 2.62; 95% CI 1.81 to 3.79) and less likely to show ST elevation (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.28); less likely to undergo coronary angiography (OR 0.09; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.12) and percutaneous coronary intervention (OR 0.06; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.10) or receive cardioprotective medications, such as statins (OR 0.25; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.38) and beta-blockers (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.63). T2MI had greater risk of all cause 1-year mortality (OR 3.11; 95% CI 1.91 to 5.08), with no differences in short-term mortality (OR 1.34; 95% CI 0.63 to 2.85).Conclusion and relevanceThis review has identified clinical, management and survival differences between T2MI and T1MI with greater precision and scope than previously reported. Differential use of coronary revascularisation and cardioprotective medications highlight ongoing uncertainty of their utility in T2MI compared with T1MI.
ImportanceDistinguishing type 2 (T2MI) from type 1 myocardial infarction (T1MI) in clinical practice can be difficult, and the management and prognosis for T2MI remain uncertain.ObjectiveTo compare precipitating factors, risk factors, investigations, management and outcomes for T2MI and T1MI.Data sourcesMedline and Embase databases as well as reference list of recent articles were searched January 2009 to December 2020 for term ‘type 2 myocardial infarction’.Study selectionStudies were included if they used a universal definition of MI and reported quantitative data on at least one variable of interest.Data extraction and synthesisData were pooled using random-effect meta-analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment tool. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines were followed. All review stages were conducted by two reviewers.Main outcomes and measuresRisk factors, presenting symptoms, cardiac investigations such as troponin and angiogram, management and outcomes such as mortality.Results40 cohort studies comprising 98 930 patients with T1MI and 13 803 patients with T2MI were included. Compared with T1MI, patients with T2MI were: more likely to have pre-existing chronic kidney disease (OR 1.87; 95% CI 1.53 to 2.28) and chronic heart failure (OR 2.35; 95% CI 1.82 to 3.03), less likely to present with typical cardiac symptoms of chest pain (OR 0.19; 95% CI 0.13 to 0.26) and more likely to present with dyspnoea (OR 2.64; 95% CI 1.86 to 3.74); more likely to demonstrate non-specific ST-T wave changes on ECG (OR 2.62; 95% CI 1.81 to 3.79) and less likely to show ST elevation (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.28); less likely to undergo coronary angiography (OR 0.09; 95% CI 0.06 to 0.12) and percutaneous coronary intervention (OR 0.06; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.10) or receive cardioprotective medications, such as statins (OR 0.25; 95% CI 0.16 to 0.38) and beta-blockers (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.33 to 0.63). T2MI had greater risk of all cause 1-year mortality (OR 3.11; 95% CI 1.91 to 5.08), with no differences in short-term mortality (OR 1.34; 95% CI 0.63 to 2.85).Conclusion and relevanceThis review has identified clinical, management and survival differences between T2MI and T1MI with greater precision and scope than previously reported. Differential use of coronary revascularisation and cardioprotective medications highlight ongoing uncertainty of their utility in T2MI compared with T1MI.
Background: Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) has metabolic disorders at its core etiology. Ayurvedic-based Panchkarma treatment has previously been reported to have reversed CAD-related conditions and improved the quality of life post-treatment. Objectives: The current study was designed to determine the effectiveness of Ayurvedic-based Panchkarma treatment as assessed by the mortality and rehospitalization rate. Methods: This was a multicenter cohort study carried out between August 2017 and August 2020 in India. The study enrolled known CAD patients (stable at rest). The study therapy included a three-step Panchkarma treatment and a low-calorie high-protein diet kit for 12 months and was monitored for up to 36 months. The hazard ratios for different risk factors including – age, body mass index (BMI), weight, diabetic status, and blood pressure were calculated using the Cox proportional hazards model and the actual number of deaths that occurred over the study period (24 months and 36 months) were recorded. Results: The study included 572 known CAD patients (78.67% of males and 21.33% of females) within the age group of 60.22 ± 10.89 years (mean ± standard deviation). Complete compliance to study therapy was recorded whereas ~15%–25% of patients were unable to follow the dietary modifications. The overall mortality rate was found to be 5.07%. BMI, weight, diabetes, and blood pressure were modified during the treatment which may have led low mortality rate. Statistically, age was the only risk factor that showed significance in determining overall survival. The total number of cases of rehospitalization during the study period was 52 (9.09%) patients. Conclusion: Our study concluded that the Panchakarma-based treatment is beneficial in reducing risk factors such as BMI, diabetes, and blood pressure in known CAD patients, thus lowering the mortality and rehospitalization rate posttreatment.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.