The appropriateness of coronary investigation in myocardial injury and type 2 myocardial infarction (ACT-2): A randomized trial design

This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. This author accepted manuscript is made available following 12 month embargo from date of publication (October 2018) in accordance with the publisher’s archiving policyBackground: Elevated troponin level findings among patients presenting with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or another intercurrent illness undeniably identifies patients at increased risk of mortality. Whilst enhancing our capacity to discriminate risk, the use of high-sensitivity troponin assays frequently identifies patients with myocardial injury (i.e. troponin rise without acute signs of myocardial ischemia) or type 2 myocardial infarction (T2MI; oxygen supply-demand imbalance). This leads to the clinically challenging task of distinguishing type 1 myocardial infarction (T1MI; coronary plaque rupture) from myocardial injury and T2MI in the context of concurrent acute illness. Diagnostic discernment in this context is crucial because MI classification has implications for further investigation and care. Early invasive management is of well-established benefit among patients with T1MI. However, the appropriateness of this investigation in the heterogeneous context of T2MI, where there is high competing mortality risk, remains unknown. Although coronary angiography in T2MI is advocated by some, there is insufficient evidence in existing literature to support this opinion as highlighted by current national guidelines.Support for this study was granted from National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (APP1146512)