2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.09.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
502
1
15

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1,480 publications
(519 citation statements)
references
References 89 publications
1
502
1
15
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, we modified case‐control definitions for exploratory sensitivity analyses: Inclusion criteria for the first set of sensitivity cohorts retained all specifications described above, but also required presence or absence of objective HF indicators (elevated n‐terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide >400 pg/mL, loop diuretic use, or HF International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision code) and excluded all patients with major adverse cardiac events (defined as myocardial infarction consistent with the universal definition,26 percutaneous coronary intervention, or coronary artery bypass grafting) 1 month before sample collection. Inclusion criteria for the second set of sensitivity cohorts varied only in its LVEF thresholds: HFpEF and no‐HF groups had LVEF ≥50% and HFrEF had LVEF <35%.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, we modified case‐control definitions for exploratory sensitivity analyses: Inclusion criteria for the first set of sensitivity cohorts retained all specifications described above, but also required presence or absence of objective HF indicators (elevated n‐terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide >400 pg/mL, loop diuretic use, or HF International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision code) and excluded all patients with major adverse cardiac events (defined as myocardial infarction consistent with the universal definition,26 percutaneous coronary intervention, or coronary artery bypass grafting) 1 month before sample collection. Inclusion criteria for the second set of sensitivity cohorts varied only in its LVEF thresholds: HFpEF and no‐HF groups had LVEF ≥50% and HFrEF had LVEF <35%.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Platelet inhibition or percent change in result PRU from baseline (calculated as [1−(result PRU)/(base PRU)]×100%)16 was also reported as available. MACE included periprocedural MI (<24 hours after PCI: creatine kinase–myocardial band elevation at least 3‐fold greater than the 99% upper limit of normal with normal baseline, or >20% rise from stable elevated baseline),17 nonperiprocedural MI (>24 hours after PCI) with or without concurrent ST‐segment elevation, rehospitalization for a suspected ACS, unplanned repeat revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, transient ischemic attack, ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, or any death.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Medical records were reviewed by a physician‐led team, and events were adjudicated following established guidelines 34, 35. Specifically, medical records were examined for signs or symptoms of ischemia, a rising and/or falling pattern in cardiac troponin or creatinine phosphokinase‐MB over ≥6 hours with a peak value greater than or equal to twice the upper limit of normal (diagnostic cardiac enzymes), and ECG changes consistent with ischemia or myocardial infarction.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Proxies or next of kin were interviewed to obtain information about the circumstances of the death. Proxy interviews, medical history, medical records in the final year of life, death certificates, and autopsy reports were gathered and reviewed by physician‐led adjudicators to determine whether the death was caused by CVD 34, 35…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%