Diagnosis, Investigation and Management of Patients with Acute and Chronic Myocardial Injury

Cardiac Rehabilitation Using the Family-Centered Empowerment Model is Effective in Improving Long-term Mortality in Patients with Myocardial Infarction: A 10-year Follow-Up Randomized Clinical Trial

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) play a critical role in reducing the risk of future cardiovascular events and enhancing the quality of life for individuals who have survived a heart attack.

AIM

To assess the mortality rates and stability of the effects in myocardial infarction (MI) survivors after implementing a Family-Centered Empowerment Model (FCEM)-focused hybrid cardiac rehabilitation program.

METHODS

This double-blind randomized controlled clinical trial, conducted at Shariati Hospital, an academic teaching hospital in Tehran, Iran (2012-2023), involved 70 MI patients and their families. Participants were randomly assigned to an FCEM intervention group or standard CR control group. The intervention commenced after the MI patient's safe discharge from the CCU and continued for the entire 10-year follow-up period. Various questionnaires were utilized to collect data on mortality rates and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).

RESULTS

The 10-year follow-up period revealed lower mortality rates in the intervention group (5.7%, 11.4%, and 17.1% at 5, 7, and 10 years, respectively) compared to the control group (20%, 37.1%, and 48.9%). After adjusting for age, gender, and BMI, the control group had a four times higher mortality risk (HR: 4.346, 95% CI 1.671-7.307, P = 0.003). The FCEM-focused program demonstrated a significant and sustained positive impact on participants' quality of life for 48 months, with greater improvement compared to the control group.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the effectiveness of FCEM-based hybrid CR programs in enhancing long-term patient outcomes and reducing mortality rates among MI survivors. Further research is needed to explore the potential benefits in larger samples and diverse populations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study (Identifier: NCT02402582) was registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov on 03/30/2015.

Management and outcomes with 5-year mortality of patients with mildly elevated high-sensitivity troponin T levels not meeting criteria for myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVES

To examine management and outcomes of patients presenting to EDs with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome, who have mild non-dynamically elevated high-sensitivity troponin T (HsTnT) levels, not meeting the fourth universal definition of myocardial infarction (MI) criteria (observation group).

METHODS

Consecutive patients presenting to the ED with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome at Liverpool Hospital, Sydney, Australia, those having ≥2 HsTnT levels after initial assessment were adjudicated according to the fourth universal definition of MI, as MI ruled-in, MI ruled-out, or myocardial injury in whom MI is neither ruled-in nor ruled-out (>1 level ≥15 ng/L, called observation group); follow-up was 5 years.

RESULTS

Of 2738 patients, 547 were in the observation group, of whom 62% were admitted to hospital, 52% to cardiac services, whereas 97% of MI ruled-in patients and 21% of MI ruled-out patients were admitted; P < 0.001. Non-invasive testing occurred in 42% of observation group patients (36% had echo-cardiography), and 16% had coronary angiography. Of observation group patients, MI rates were 1.5% during hospitalisation and 4% during the following year, similar to that in those with MI ruled-in, among those with MI ruled-out, the MI rate was 0.2%. The 1-year death rate was 13% among observation group patients and 11% MI ruled-in patients (P = 0.624), whereas at 5 years among observation group patients, type 1 MI and type 2 MI were 48%, 26% and 58%, respectively (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Very few unselected consecutive patients attending ED, with minor stable HsTnT elevation, had MI, although most had chronic myocardial injury. Late mortality rates among observation group patients were higher than those with confirmed type 1 MI but lower than those with type 2 MI.

Risk factors for type 1 and type 2 myocardial infarction

AIMS

Whilst the risk factors for type 1 myocardial infarction due to atherosclerotic plaque rupture and thrombosis are established, our understanding of the factors that predispose to type 2 myocardial infarction during acute illness is still emerging. Our aim was to evaluate and compare the risk factors for type 1 and type 2 myocardial infarction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a secondary analysis of a multi-centre randomized trial population of 48 282 consecutive patients attending hospital with suspected acute coronary syndrome. The diagnosis of myocardial infarction during the index presentation and all subsequent reattendances was adjudicated according to the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. Cox regression was used to identify predictors of future type 1 and type 2 myocardial infarction during a 1-year follow-up period. Within 1 year, 1331 patients had a subsequent myocardial infarction, with 924 and 407 adjudicated as type 1 and type 2 myocardial infarction, respectively. Risk factors for type 1 and type 2 myocardial infarction were similar, with age, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes, abnormal renal function, and known coronary disease predictors for both (P < 0.05 for all). Whilst women accounted for a greater proportion of patients with type 2 as compared to type 1 myocardial infarction, after adjustment for other risk factors, sex was not a predictor of type 2 myocardial events [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66-1.01]. The strongest predictor of type 2 myocardial infarction was a prior history of type 2 events (aHR 6.18, 95% CI 4.70-8.12).

CONCLUSIONS

Risk factors for coronary disease that are associated with type 1 myocardial infarction are also important predictors of type 2 events during acute illness. Treatment of these risk factors may reduce future risk of both type 1 and type 2 myocardial infarction.

Therapeutic Applications of Extracellular Vesicles for Myocardial Repair

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of human death worldwide. Drug thrombolysis, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting and other methods are used to restore blood perfusion for coronary artery stenosis and blockage. The treatments listed prolong lifespan, however, rate of mortality ultimately remains the same. This is due to the irreversible damage sustained by myocardium, in which millions of heart cells are lost during myocardial infarction. The lack of pragmatic methods of myocardial restoration remains the greatest challenge for effective treatment. Exosomes are small extracellular vesicles (EVs) actively secreted by all cell types that act as effective transmitters of biological signals which contribute to both reparative and pathological processes within the heart. Exosomes have become the focus of many researchers as a novel drug delivery system due to the advantages of low toxicity, little immunogenicity and good permeability. In this review, we discuss the progress and challenges of EVs in myocardial repair, and review the recent development of extracellular vesicle-loading systems based on their unique nanostructures and physiological functions, as well as the application of engineering modifications in the diagnosis and treatment of myocardial repair.

Role of Cardiac Biomarkers in Cancer Patients

Simple Summary

Cardiac biomarkers have proved increasingly useful in the various branches of cardiology, not sparing the field of cardio-oncology. With specific reference to the latter subject, they have been investigated as predictors and/or diagnostic and monitoring tools, as well as prognostic factors, with the purpose of allowing the early prevention of many cardiovascular complications related to the direct action of some cancer types or related to the toxicity of its treatments. However, despite this great potential and excellent cost-effectiveness, their usefulness in some areas still seems to be limited due to lack of sufficient specificity or sensitivity. In fact, in clinical practice, while their use is nowadays standard in some circumstances, evidence does not yet support their routine use in other cases.

Abstract

In patients with cancer—and especially some specific subtypes—the heart can be pathologically affected due to the direct action of the tumor or its secretion products or due to the toxicity of some oncological treatments. Cardiac biomarkers have been investigated as inexpensive and easily accessible tools for prediction, early diagnosis, monitoring, or prognosis of various forms of cancer-related cardiac diseases. However, their clinical usefulness was not always clearly demonstrated in every area of cardioncology. For the identification of anthracycline related cardiotoxicity in the very early stages troponins proved to be more efficient detectors than imaging methods. Nevertheless, the lack of a standardized dosage methodology and of cardiotoxicity specific thresholds, do not yet allow to outline the precise way to employ them in clinical routine and to incorporate them into appropriate diagnostic or managing algorithms. Cardiac biomarkers proved also effective in patients with primary cardiac amyloidosis, in which both troponins and natriuretic peptides were able to predict adverse outcome, and carcinoid heart disease, where a precise diagnostic cut-off for N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) was identified to screen patients with valvular involvement. Likewise, NT-proBNP proved to be an excellent predictor of postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF). On the contrary, evidence is still not sufficient to promote the routine use of cardiac biomarkers to early diagnose myocarditis due to immune check points inhibitors (ICIs), radiotherapy induced cardiotoxicity and cardiac complications related to androgenetic deprivation. In this review we present all the evidence gathered so far regarding the usefulness and limitations of these relatively inexpensive diagnostic tools in the field of cardio-oncology.

Key Characteristics of Cardiovascular Toxicants

BACKGROUND

The concept of chemical agents having properties that confer potential hazard called key characteristics (KCs) was first developed to identify carcinogenic hazards. Identification of KCs of cardiovascular (CV) toxicants could facilitate the systematic assessment of CV hazards and understanding of assay and data gaps associated with current approaches.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to develop a consensus-based synthesis of scientific evidence on the KCs of chemical and nonchemical agents known to cause CV toxicity along with methods to measure them.

METHODS

An expert working group was convened to discuss mechanisms associated with CV toxicity.

RESULTS

The group identified 12 KCs of CV toxicants, defined as exogenous agents that adversely interfere with function of the CV system. The KCs were organized into those primarily affecting cardiac tissue (numbers 1-4 below), the vascular system (5-7), or both (8-12), as follows: 1) impairs regulation of cardiac excitability, 2) impairs cardiac contractility and relaxation, 3) induces cardiomyocyte injury and death, 4) induces proliferation of valve stroma, 5) impacts endothelial and vascular function, 6) alters hemostasis, 7) causes dyslipidemia, 8) impairs mitochondrial function, 9) modifies autonomic nervous system activity, 10) induces oxidative stress, 11) causes inflammation, and 12) alters hormone signaling.

DISCUSSION

These 12 KCs can be used to help identify pharmaceuticals and environmental pollutants as CV toxicants, as well as to better understand the mechanistic underpinnings of their toxicity. For example, evidence exists that fine particulate matter [PM ≤2.5μm in aerodynamic diameter (PM2.5)] air pollution, arsenic, anthracycline drugs, and other exogenous chemicals possess one or more of the described KCs. In conclusion, the KCs could be used to identify potential CV toxicants and to define a set of test methods to evaluate CV toxicity in a more comprehensive and standardized manner than current approaches. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP9321.

Cardiac Troponin Thresholds and Kinetics to Differentiate Myocardial Injury and Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

Although the 99th percentile is the recommended diagnostic threshold for myocardial infarction, some guidelines also advocate the use of higher troponin thresholds to rule in myocardial infarction at presentation. It is unclear whether the magnitude or change in troponin concentration can differentiate causes of myocardial injury and infarction in practice.

METHODS

In a secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized controlled trial, we identified 46 092 consecutive patients presenting with suspected acute coronary syndrome without ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. High-sensitivity cardiac troponin I concentrations at presentation and on serial testing were compared between patients with myocardial injury and infarction. The positive predictive value and specificity were determined at the sex-specific 99th percentile upper reference limit and rule-in thresholds of 64 ng/L and 5-fold of the upper reference limit for a diagnosis of type 1 myocardial infarction.

RESULTS

Troponin was above the 99th percentile in 8188 patients (18%). The diagnosis was type 1 or type 2 myocardial infarction in 50% and 14% and acute or chronic myocardial injury in 20% and 16%, respectively. Troponin concentrations were similar at presentation in type 1 (median [25th-75th percentile] 91 [30-493] ng/L) and type 2 (50 [22-147] ng/L) myocardial infarction and in acute (50 [26-134] ng/L) and chronic (51 [31-130] ng/L) myocardial injury. The 99th percentile and rule-in thresholds of 64 ng/L and 5-fold upper reference limit gave a positive predictive value of 57% (95% CI, 56%-58%), 59% (58%-61%), and 62% (60%-64%) and a specificity of 96% (96%-96%), 96% (96%-96%), and 98% (97%-98%), respectively. The absolute, relative, and rate of change in troponin concentration were highest in patients with type 1 myocardial infarction (P<0.001 for all). Discrimination improved when troponin concentration and change in troponin were combined compared with troponin concentration at presentation alone (area under the curve, 0.661 [0.642-0.680] versus 0.613 [0.594-0.633]).

CONCLUSIONS

Although we observed important differences in the kinetics, cardiac troponin concentrations at presentation are insufficient to distinguish type 1 myocardial infarction from other causes of myocardial injury or infarction in practice and should not guide management decisions in isolation. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01852123.