The assessment and management of patients with type 2 myocardial infarction: an international Delphi study

European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes

4 September 2025
Organised by: Logo
ESC Journals CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE, ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROMES, ACUTE CARDIAC CARE Acute Cardiac Care Acute Coronary Syndromes

Abstract

AbstractAims

Type 2 myocardial infarction due to myocardial oxygen supply–demand imbalance is associated with poor outcomes. There are no guidelines to inform care for these patients. The consensus on the assessment and management of type 2 myocardial infarction is gained.

Methods and results

An international e-Delphi study including experts in type 2 myocardial infarction identified through systematic review was conducted. Participants were asked to describe their approach to (i) definition and diagnosis, (ii) risk stratification, (iii) assessment of coronary artery disease and cardiac function, (iv) specialty management, (v) treatment and secondary prevention, and (vi) communication and rehabilitation. Statements generated in round one were circulated, with consensus defined a priori as ≥70% agreement on a 5-point Likert scale. Where no consensus was reached, statements were amended and recirculated for a final round. The response rate was 56% (38/68), 54% (37/68), and 72% (49/68) in the first, second, and third rounds, respectively. Following the first round, 67 unique statements were generated across six domains. Overall, consensus was achieved on 64% (43/67) of statements. Consensus was achieved for 42% (5/12) of statements on the diagnosis of type 2 myocardial infarction, 75% (3/4) on risk stratification, 50% (9/18) on the assessment of coronary artery disease and cardiac function, 60% (6/10), on specialty management, 100% (9/9) on treatment and secondary prevention, and 79% (11/15) on communication and rehabilitation.

Conclusion

Consensus was obtained across a number of domains for the assessment and management of patients with type 2 myocardial infarction. However, there was limited agreement amongst experts on the diagnostic criteria, which may benefit from refinement.

Contributors

Nicholas L Mills
Nicholas L Mills

Author

University of Edinburgh Edinburgh , United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland

Louise Cullen
Louise Cullen

Author

Queensland University of Technology Herston , Australia

Mamas A Mamas
Mamas A Mamas

Author

Keele University Keele , United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland

ESC 365 is supported by