CONTENTS
- Rapid Reference 🚀
- Introduction
- How to screw this up
- Approach to ischemia evaluation
- Treatment
- Podcast
- Questions & discussion
- Pitfalls
approach to ischemic evaluation for patients with a non-cardiac chief complaint:
sorting out Type-I vs. Type-II MI:
management of type-II MI:
- The key intervention is treatment of underlying cause.
- There are NO proven therapies for type-II MI. However, the following treatments may be considered on an individual basis, depending on the clinical context (and especially if there is some residual concern about the possibility of Type-I MI):
- Aspirin.
- Transfusion to a hemoglobin target >8 mg/dL.
- Avoid beta-adrenergic vasopressors, as able.
- Control hypertension if safe to do so.
This chapter is about how to approach ischemia evaluation for the “non-cardiac” critically ill patient (someone admitted for a problem such as sepsis, stroke, or DKA). This is tough. We want to be thorough enough not to miss significant infarctions. However, excessive testing risks over-diagnosis of ischemia, leading to a host of iatrogenic harms.
baseline cardiac investigation in the non-cardiac patient
- Investigating a patient's cardiac function can be useful for many reasons:
- This will occasionally show an unexpected acute disease processes (e.g., tamponade, massive pulmonary embolism).
- More often this will reveal a chronic disease that may affect how the patient responds to acute illness (e.g., severe aortic stenosis, chronic pulmonary hypertension, cardiomyopathy).
- Baseline EKG is advisable in almost all critically ill patients.
- This will help interpret any changes in rhythm or morphology which may occur during the patient's ICU course. It may also help if the patient presents to the hospital in the future with cardiac symptoms.
- Baseline point-of-care echocardiography may be helpful as well.
- If significant abnormalities are found, a formal echocardiogram may be ordered to confirm, quantify, and document abnormalities.
risks of over-diagnosing myocardial ischemia
- Incorrectly diagnosing a patient with MI can cause a variety of problems.
- (1) Bleeding risk from anticoagulation
- Heparin increases the risk of hemorrhage. Most of these are non-lethal GI bleeds, but occasionally heparin will cause intracranial hemorrhage. The risk for any individual patient is low, but over time indiscriminate use of heparin will eventually cause severe harm.
- (2) Cardiac catheterization & stent risk
- Risks of catheterization include hemorrhage and kidney injury. Renal toxicity is particularly problematic, as critically ill patients frequently have some degree of kidney injury already. (Although the venous contrast administration isn't actually nephrotoxic, contrast nephropathy following cardiac catheterization is real)
- Stent placement obligates the patient to remain on dual antiplatelet therapy. This may be problematic if the patient subsequently requires surgery or develops bleeding (frequent occurrences in a complex ICU patient).
- (3) Interference with other essential procedures
- Once the patient is labeled as having a myocardial infarction, this will often scare off anyone from doing procedures on the patient (especially anesthesiologists and surgeons).
- This can derail the patient's entire plan of care. Rather than fixing the patient's actual problem, the focus of care may shift towards treatment of a “myocardial infarction” that doesn't really exist.
I never received formal instruction on this topic, so I screwed it up for years. Seriously, mea culpa. It's easy for smart and well-intentioned folks to do this wrong and cause harm.
Superficially this strategy might seem OK, but there are a ton of problems here. Many of these problems will be explored further below, but one is worth mentioning here.
checking troponin without checking an EKG
- EKG is the first-line test for myocardial infarction. An EKG tells you in real time how much tissue is ischemic. For example, a patient with acute myocardial occlusion may have dramatic EKG changes with a negative troponin (troponin takes a couple hours to rise).
- Cycling troponin without checking EKGs is just plain wrong. If the patient does have a massive MI, this strategy won't diagnose it until substantial myocardial damage has already been done.
The approach to ischemia boils down to three decision points. Let's walk through them.
troponin is often positive among critically ill patients
- Using standard troponin assays, ~40% of patients in an ICU will have an elevated troponin.(28979516) Most of these troponin elevations don't represent MI – this simply reflects global stress on the heart due to critical illness. Numerous disorders are capable of causing troponin elevation in critical illness (e.g., sepsis, chronic kidney disease, stroke, PE, heart failure, defibrillation).(30571511)
- About half of healthy people who run a marathon will also develop an elevated troponin.(20663014) Neither marathon runners, nor most ICU patients with elevated troponin, require specific treatment for this lab abnormality.
- Elevated troponin does correlate with increased mortality. Thus, for most critically ill patients troponin functions as a death marker (not an MI marker).
broad application of troponin destroys its use as a clinical test
- Among sick, non-cardiac ICU patients, troponin has the following performance:
- Sensitivity for MI is extremely high (nearly 100%)
- Specificity might be ~60% for MI.(28979516)
- This creates the following positive and negative likelihood ratios:
- Positive likelihood ratio = 2.5
- Negative likelihood ratio = 0
- Therefore, if we apply this test to a patient with low pretest probability for MI (let's say, 5% pre-test probability), then a positive test only increases the post-test probability marginally (from 5% to 12%). Even with a positive troponin, the patient is unlikely to have a myocardial infarction.
- Broad application of troponin testing to a low-risk population will yield almost entirely false-positive results.
- This isn't the test's fault, it's our fault. Inappropriate application of any clinical test to patients with low pretest probability will yield more false-positive than true-positive results.
every ICU patient needs an EKG – not a troponin
- There is myth that every ICU patient needs a troponin level “just to be safe.” This is wrong. Troponin should only be obtained if there is genuine concern for myocardial ischemia based on history and EKG.
- EKG is a good initial test for ischemia because minor, nonspecific abnormalities won't trigger a huge ischemia evaluation.
- Physician judgement is built into the EKG test itself. So you can order tons of EKGs without causing harm, whereas if you start shotgun ordering troponin this leads to iatrogenic chaos.
diagnosis of an MI requires the following:
- A dynamic rise and fall in troponin (>20% variation), plus
- At least one of the following:
- Clinical history suggestive of MI.
- New ischemic EKG changes.
- New wall motion abnormality on echocardiography.
- (Technically a fourth option here is identification of a coronary thrombus on cardiac catheterization. However in clinical practice catheterization is rarely used as a primary tool to diagnose myocardial infarction.)
positive troponin usually doesn't indicate an MI (myocardial infarction)
- Most troponin elevations in the ICU don't actually represent an MI.
- Beware of patients with renal failure and chronically elevated troponin – if the troponin isn't rising/falling then it's not an MI. Review the patient's prior troponin values, if possible.
- Patients with elevated troponin who don't meet the definition of a MI (myocardial ischemia) are described as having myocardial injury.(30571511)
don't treat non-MI troponin elevations (myocardial injury)
- Isolated troponin elevation shouldn't be treated as an MI (e.g., with anticoagulation).
- Treat the underlying disease (e.g., sepsis, hypoxemia, anemia).
what is a type-1 or type-2 MI?
- Type-I MI: Primary plaque rupture causing a myocardial infarction (for example, a patient who presents to the ED with chest pain and acute occlusion of a coronary artery).
- As discussed below, these patients may benefit from traditional MI therapy.
- Type-II MI (demand ischemia): Myocardial infarction not involving unstable coronary plaque. This is usually due to stable coronary stenoses in the context of physiologic stress (e.g., anemia, hypoxemia, inotropes, tachycardia). However, Type-II MI can also occur in the setting of normal coronaries due to severe stress (e.g., sustained tachyarrhythmia).
- Type-II MI can be roughly conceptualized as a patient with a positive stress test. The patient usually does have coronary disease, and myocardial ischemia did occur. However, the patient doesn't have unstable coronary plaque. Once the acute stressor is removed, the patient isn't in immediate danger from coronary ischemia.
- These patients don't require traditional MI therapy (e.g., catheterization, anticoagulation).
differentiating type-I vs. type-II MI
- Sorting this out is difficult, often relying heavily on clinical judgement.
- A key consideration is comparing the severity of physiologic stress vs. the severity of myocardial ischemia. For example, if you give someone 500 mcg of subcutaneous epinephrine and they develop transient chest pain and a troponin of 0.7 ng/ml, that's probably a type-2 MI. If the same symptoms developed in the absence of any stressor (chest pain and troponin elevation out of the blue), then that's probably a type-1 MI.
- The table below includes some factors which can help guide this differentiation. Unfortunately, none of these factors in isolation are 100% reliable.
- In unclear situations, serial EKG can be helpful. For example, a patient might present with chest pain, EKG changes, and a GI hemorrhage. If treating the GI bleed causes the EKG changes and chest pain to disappear, that suggests a type-2 MI. Alternatively, if you fix the GI bleed and the patient continues having chest pain and ischemic EKG changes, then that's more worrisome for type-1 MI.
troponin levels in Type-I vs Type-II MI
- There is no reliable cutoff value for troponin levels that differentiates Type-I vs. Type-II MI.(31416350)
- Usually patients with Type-II MI do tend to have lower troponin values (figure below). However, some patients with Type-II MI may have severe, fixed coronary atherosclerosis (e.g., left main or triple-vessel disease). Such patients may develop diffuse ST depression in the context of physiological stress with large elevations in troponin – all occurring without plaque rupture or acute thrombosis.
echocardiographic strategy to sorting type-I vs. type-II MI
- Every single patient with a troponin elevation doesn't require an echocardiogram. However, echocardiography can be helpful if there is difficulty differentiating between type-1 and type-2 MI.
- Available evidence suggests that in ICU patients without echocardiographic features of ischemia, catheterization is unlikely to reveal a treatable coronary lesion (Type-I MI).(28979516)
- Echocardiography may be particularly useful in situations of global myocardial ischemia (e.g., due to anemia, hypoxemia, and inotropes). Diffuse ischemia may cause a very scary EKG pattern (e.g. diffuse STD with STE in aVR) and substantial elevation in troponin. However, echocardiography will reveal a hyperkinetic ventricle without wall motion abnormalities, arguing against Type-I MI.
- The main limitation of echocardiography is that in the context of an aging population, lots of patients have chronic wall motion abnormalities. In the absence of a prior echocardiogram, such abnormalities could masquerade as an acute MI. One clue that the wall motion abnormality may be chronic is mismatch between a significant wall motion abnormality versus a minor troponin elevation.
- The key is always integration of multiple features (e.g., echocardiography, EKG, history, and troponin).
- The following is an example of how echocardiography could be used:
This involves the traditional management of MI that we all learned on the cardiology service (e.g. aspirin, P2Y12-inhibitor, anticoagulation, beta-blockade, potentially cardiac catheterization).📖
this is an evidence-free zone
- No RCTs exist on the treatment of ICU patients with demand ischemia.
reasonable management strategy?
- The most important treatment is management of the underlying process.
- Aspirin is reasonable in the absence of contraindications. This is supported by one observational study.(28454759)
- Transfusion to a slightly higher hemoglobin target than usual may be reasonable (>8 mg/dL) .
- Hemodynamic optimization?
- If the patient is on vasopressors, consider trying to reduce the amount of beta-agonist stimulation.
- If the patient is hypertensive, consider treating hypertension (possibly a beta-blocker, if systemic perfusion is adequate and there are no contraindications to beta-blockade).
As discussed above, it's not always possible to immediately classify a patient into type-1 vs. type-2 MI. In these situations, the following management strategy may be reasonable (noting that this is another evidence-free zone). These patients will be followed carefully over time (e.g. with serial troponin and EKGs) which may help ultimately clarify whether they have type-1 versus type-2 MI.
basic initial management
- Aspirin, if not contraindicated.
- Treatment of anemia, with a target hemoglobin >8 mg/dL.
- Reduce stress on the heart, as able:
- If the patient is on vasopressors, consider trying to reduce the amount of beta-agonist stimulation.
- If the patient is hypertensive, consider treating hypertension (possibly a beta-blocker, if systemic perfusion is adequate and there are no contraindications to beta-blockade).
consider fondaparinux 2.5 mg daily
- Administration of 2.5 mg daily fondaparinux is a reasonable anticoagulation strategy here. This is a completely legitimate treatment for Type-1 MI, in fact it is suggested as front-line therapy in the European Society of Cardiology guidelines.(29928314, 26320110)
- 2.5 mg fondaparinux is the dose studied for use in myocardial infarction. It is also the dose used for DVT prophylaxis (compared to 7.5 mg daily, which is the full therapeutic dose for DVT/PE).
- Thus, 2.5 mg fondaparinux can be used to serve a dual purpose of anticoagulation for MI as well as DVT prophylaxis.
- The fact that 2.5 mg fondaparinux is the DVT prophylactic dose should indirectly show that it has a low bleeding risk (considerably lower than a heparin infusion).
- Fondaparinux is contraindicated in patients with renal dysfunction (e.g. GFR <30 ml/min).
avoid heparin infusions
- First, let's consider some basic principles of heparin use in MI:🌊
- Heparin causes a transient reduction in the rate of ischemic events while the patient is anticoagulated. Unfortunately, after heparin is stopped, there is a rebound in ischemic events. Ultimately, the risk of an ischemic event is the same, with or without heparin therapy.
- There is no sustained net benefit from providing a patient with 48 hours of heparin as “medical management” for MI.(8006281) This exposes patients to the risks of anticoagulation, without causing any sustained reduction in the rate of re-infarction or death.
- Heparin should be used only as a temporary bridge to stabilize a patient while they are awaiting cardiac catheterization.
- There may be a temptation to start a heparin infusion here. However, heparin is generally suboptimal for the following reasons:
- If the patient has adequate renal function, fondaparinux 2.5 mg daily is safer (see above).
- Heparin is only useful as a temporary bridge to cardiac catheterization. The vast majority of patients in this group won't go for urgent catheterization, so they won't benefit from heparin therapy.
Follow us on iTunes
The Podcast Episode
Want to Download the Episode?
Right Click Here and Choose Save-As
To keep this page small and fast, questions & discussion about this post can be found on another page here.
- Don't order a troponin level unless you truly suspect that the patient is having a myocardial infarction.
- Don't order a troponin level without getting an EKG as well.
- Consider echocardiography as a diagnostic tool to evaluate for plaque-rupture MI (type-I MI).
- Avoid heparin infusions, with consideration of 2.5 mg fondaparinux instead.
- Don't be surprised when your critically ill patient is found to have an elevated troponin level – this is extremely common among ICU patients.
Guide to emoji hyperlinks
- = Link to online calculator.
- = Link to Medscape monograph about a drug.
- = Link to IBCC section about a drug.
- = Link to IBCC section covering that topic.
- = Link to FOAMed site with related information.
- = Link to supplemental media.
Going further
- There is precious little published about MI in the non-cardiac ICU patient. The best evidence review seems to be Carroll et al. 2016.(28979516)
- Blogs
- Heparin is non beneficial for noninvasive treatment of MI (PulmCrit)
- Non-MI troponin elevation (EMDocs by Christina Smith et al.)
References
- 08006281 Holdright D, Patel D, Cunningham D, Thomas R, Hubbard W, Hendry G, Sutton G, Fox K. Comparison of the effect of heparin and aspirin versus aspirin alone on transient myocardial ischemia and in-hospital prognosis in patients with unstable angina. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1994 Jul;24(1):39-45. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(94)90539-8 [PubMed]
- 16537663 Fifth Organization to Assess Strategies in Acute Ischemic Syndromes Investigators, Yusuf S, Mehta SR, Chrolavicius S, Afzal R, Pogue J, Granger CB, Budaj A, Peters RJ, Bassand JP, Wallentin L, Joyner C, Fox KA. Comparison of fondaparinux and enoxaparin in acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2006 Apr 6;354(14):1464-76. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa055443 [PubMed]
- 16537725 Yusuf S, Mehta SR, Chrolavicius S, Afzal R, Pogue J, Granger CB, Budaj A, Peters RJ, Bassand JP, Wallentin L, Joyner C, Fox KA; OASIS-6 Trial Group. Effects of fondaparinux on mortality and reinfarction in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the OASIS-6 randomized trial. JAMA. 2006 Apr 5;295(13):1519-30. doi: 10.1001/jama.295.13.joc60038 [PubMed]
- 20663014 Regwan S, Hulten EA, Martinho S, Slim J, Villines TC, Mitchell J, Slim AM. Marathon running as a cause of troponin elevation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Interv Cardiol. 2010 Oct;23(5):443-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8183.2010.00575.x [PubMed]
- 25688782 Szummer K, Oldgren J, Lindhagen L, Carrero JJ, Evans M, Spaak J, Edfors R, Jacobson SH, Andell P, Wallentin L, Jernberg T. Association between the use of fondaparinux vs low-molecular-weight heparin and clinical outcomes in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2015 Feb 17;313(7):707-16. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.517 [PubMed]
- 26320110 Roffi M, Patrono C, Collet JP, Mueller C, Valgimigli M, Andreotti F, Bax JJ, Borger MA, Brotons C, Chew DP, Gencer B, Hasenfuss G, Kjeldsen K, Lancellotti P, Landmesser U, Mehilli J, Mukherjee D, Storey RF, Windecker S; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: Task Force for the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2016 Jan 14;37(3):267-315. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv320 [PubMed]
- 28454759 Kortbaoui R, Allyn J, Guglielminotti J, Bussienne F, Montravers P, Martinet O, Vandroux D, Desmard M, Augustin P, Allou N. Pattern and consequences of cardiologic medications management for patients with elevated troponin I upon admission into an intensive care unit not linked to type 1 acute myocardial infarction: A prospective observational cohort study. Ann Pharm Fr. 2017 Jul;75(4):285-293. doi: 10.1016/j.pharma.2017.03.002 [PubMed]
- 28979516 Carroll I, Mount T, Atkinson D. Myocardial infarction in intensive care units: A systematic review of diagnosis and treatment. J Intensive Care Soc. 2016 Nov;17(4):314-325. doi: 10.1177/1751143716656642 [PubMed]
- 29928314 Onwordi EN, Gamal A, Zaman A. Anticoagulant Therapy for Acute Coronary Syndromes. Interv Cardiol. 2018 May;13(2):87-92. doi: 10.15420/icr.2017:26:1 [PubMed]
- 30571511 Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, Chaitman BR, Bax JJ, Morrow DA, White HD; Executive Group on behalf of the Joint European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA)/World Heart Federation (WHF) Task Force for the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction (2018). Circulation. 2018 Nov 13;138(20):e618-e651. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000617 [PubMed]
- 30975302 Sandoval Y, Jaffe AS. Type 2 Myocardial Infarction: JACC Review Topic of the Week. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Apr 16;73(14):1846-1860. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2019.02.018 [PubMed]
- 31416350 DeFilippis AP, Chapman AR, Mills NL, de Lemos JA, Arbab-Zadeh A, Newby LK, Morrow DA. Assessment and Treatment of Patients With Type 2 Myocardial Infarction and Acute Nonischemic Myocardial Injury. Circulation. 2019 Nov 12;140(20):1661-1678. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.040631 [PubMed]