Prognostic significance of the discrepancy between STEMI/NSTEMI paradigm and the angiographically confirmed diagnosis of Occlusion Myocardial Infarction: a retrospective cohort study

<h2>Abstract</h2><h3>Background</h3> It is commonly assumed that acute total occlusion of the infarct-related artery corresponds to the diagnosis of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), yet growing evidence suggests that the ST-elevation/non–ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) paradigm is inadequate for guiding emergency revascularization. <h3>Methods</h3> We conducted a retrospective study and assessed the association of occlusion/non-occlusion myocardial infarction (OMI/NOMI) angiographic diagnosis with short-term mortality, compared with the ECG diagnosis of STEMI/NSTEMI. Data from 1540 patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous cardiac intervention (PCI) (68 % males, 40.3 % with initial diagnosis of STEMI, 51.6 % with final diagnosis of OMI) were analyzed. OMI was defined as MI with Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 0–2 flow before revascularization. Primary aim was to compare 30-day mortality risk between NSTEMI-OMI and STEMI. <h3>Results</h3> Among patients initially identified as NSTEMI, 37.3 % had OMI. Although the infarct size as assessed by peak troponin hs-cTnT was smaller in NSTEMI-OMI than in STEMI patients (median (IQR): 17497.16 (3596.56–25,000.10) vs 25,000.1 (10,893.41–25,000.10) ng/L; p < 0.001) however, NSTEMI-OMI patients did not differ in 30-day mortality risk in comparison to STEMI patients (HR 0.75, 95 %CI 0.51–1.11, p = 0.146) and had significantly higher mortality risk than NSTEMI-NOMI patients (HR 2.4, 95 %CI 1.46–4.01, p = 0.001). <h3>Conclusions</h3> The high prevalence of OMI among NSTEMI patients and their unfavorable outcomes clearly demonstrate that the assessment of acute myocardial infarction should not rely solely on ST-segment elevation on admission ECG, as the STEMI/NSTEMI classification may miss patients with acute coronary occlusion who require urgent reperfusion.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Heliyon
Published
2025-11-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2025.e44168
Primary Topic
Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Prognostic significance of the discrepancy between STEMI/NSTEMI paradigm and the angiographically confirmed diagnosis of Occlusion Myocardial Infarction: a retrospective cohort study

Emil Dadański, Jakub Rusinek, Stanisław Bartuś, Stephen W. Smith et al.
Heliyon
Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
article

Prognostic significance of the discrepancy between STEMI/NSTEMI paradigm and the angiographically confirmed diagnosis of Occlusion Myocardial Infarction: a retrospective cohort study

Emil Dadański, Jakub Rusinek, Stanisław Bartuś, Stephen W. Smith, Maciej Zając, Michał Terlecki, Wojciech Wojakowski, Maryla Kocowska‐Trytko, Christopher Pavlinec, Robert Herman, Łukasz Rzeszutko, Marek Rajzer, H. Pendell Meyers, Wiktoria Wojciechowska, Łukasz Klima
article en

Abstract

<h2>Abstract</h2><h3>Background</h3> It is commonly assumed that acute total occlusion of the infarct-related artery corresponds to the diagnosis of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), yet growing evidence suggests that the ST-elevation/non–ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) paradigm is inadequate for guiding emergency revascularization. <h3>Methods</h3> We conducted a retrospective study and assessed the association of occlusion/non-occlusion myocardial infarction (OMI/NOMI) angiographic diagnosis with short-term mortality, compared with the ECG diagnosis of STEMI/NSTEMI. Data from 1540 patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with percutaneous cardiac intervention (PCI) (68 % males, 40.3 % with initial diagnosis of STEMI, 51.6 % with final diagnosis of OMI) were analyzed. OMI was defined as MI with Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 0–2 flow before revascularization. Primary aim was to compare 30-day mortality risk between NSTEMI-OMI and STEMI. <h3>Results</h3> Among patients initially identified as NSTEMI, 37.3 % had OMI. Although the infarct size as assessed by peak troponin hs-cTnT was smaller in NSTEMI-OMI than in STEMI patients (median (IQR): 17497.16 (3596.56–25,000.10) vs 25,000.1 (10,893.41–25,000.10) ng/L; p < 0.001) however, NSTEMI-OMI patients did not differ in 30-day mortality risk in comparison to STEMI patients (HR 0.75, 95 %CI 0.51–1.11, p = 0.146) and had significantly higher mortality risk than NSTEMI-NOMI patients (HR 2.4, 95 %CI 1.46–4.01, p = 0.001). <h3>Conclusions</h3> The high prevalence of OMI among NSTEMI patients and their unfavorable outcomes clearly demonstrate that the assessment of acute myocardial infarction should not rely solely on ST-segment elevation on admission ECG, as the STEMI/NSTEMI classification may miss patients with acute coronary occlusion who require urgent reperfusion.

HeliyonVol. 12(1)
Jagiellonian University (PL), University of Minnesota (US), Medical University of Silesia (PL), Carolinas Medical Center (US), Flanders Environment Agency (BE), Hennepin Healthcare Research Institute (US), University of Naples Federico II (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 46%
Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.