4.6 Review

Chest pain, dyspnea and other symptoms in patients with type 1 and 2 myocardial infarction. A literature review

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
Volume 215, Issue -, Pages 20-22

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.04.045

Keywords

Myocardial infarction; Type 2; Diagnosis; Symptoms; Chest pain

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Some studies investigated the leading demographic and clinical characteristics of patient with type 2 myocardial infarction (MI), but a comprehensive analysis between type 1 and 2 MI patients is lacking. Therefore, we reviewed current evidence about the difference in clinical signs and symptoms at presentation in patients with type 1 and 2 MI. Materials and methods: We conducted an electronic search in Medline (with PubMed interface), Scopus and ISI Web of Science using the keywords Type(-)2 or Type II and myocardial infarction and chest pain and dyspnea in Title/Abstract/Keywords, with no language restriction, date limited from year 2007 to present, and study cohorts including more than 400 overall cases of MI. Results: Overall, 37 documents were identified, but 33 were excluded since thoughtful comparison between the frequency of chest pain, dyspnea and other symptoms between patients with type 1 and type 2 MI was unavailable. Therefore, 4 studies were finally selected for analysis. Despite significant heterogeneity, the frequency of chest pain was consistently higher in patients with type 1 than type 2 MI (85% vs. 61%; p < 0.001), whereas that of dyspnea and other symptoms was approximately 60-70% lower in type 1 than in type 2 MI. The odds ratio of chest pain was 3.5 in type 1 compared to type 2 MI, whereas that of dyspnea and other symptoms was 0.27 and 0.39 in type 1 compared to type 2 MI, respectively. Conclusion: Our literature analysis suggests that atypical presentation may be more frequent in type 2 than in type 1 MI. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available