VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston University School of Medicine, 150 S. Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02130, USA.
Division of Cardiology, University of Pisa and Pisa University Hospital, Pisa, Italy.
Eur Heart J. 2024 Sep 29;45(36):3701-3706. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehae278.
Since the 1960s, cardiologists have adopted several binary classification systems for acute myocardial infarction (MI) that facilitated improved patient management. Conversely, for chronic stable manifestations of myocardial ischaemia, various classifications have emerged over time, often with conflicting terminology-e.g. 'stable coronary artery disease' (CAD), 'stable ischaemic heart disease', and 'chronic coronary syndromes' (CCS). While the 2019 European guidelines introduced CCS to impart symmetry with 'acute coronary syndromes' (ACS), the 2023 American guidelines endorsed the alternative term 'chronic coronary disease'. An unintended consequence of these competing classifications is perpetuation of the restrictive terms 'coronary' and 'disease', often connoting only a singular obstructive CAD mechanism. It is now important to advance a more broadly inclusive terminology for both obstructive and non-obstructive causes of angina and myocardial ischaemia that fosters conceptual clarity and unifies dyssynchronous nomenclatures across guidelines. We, therefore, propose a new binary classification of 'acute myocardial ischaemic syndromes' and 'non-acute myocardial ischaemic syndromes', which comprises both obstructive epicardial and non-obstructive pathogenetic mechanisms, including microvascular dysfunction, vasospastic disorders, and non-coronary causes. We herein retain accepted categories of ACS, ST-segment elevation MI, and non-ST-segment elevation MI, as important subsets for which revascularization is of proven clinical benefit, as well as new terms like ischaemia and MI with non-obstructive coronary arteries. Overall, such a more encompassing nomenclature better aligns, unifies, and harmonizes different pathophysiologic causes of myocardial ischaemia and should result in more refined diagnostic and therapeutic approaches targeted to the multiple pathobiological precipitants of angina pectoris, ischaemia and infarction.
自 20 世纪 60 年代以来,心脏病学家采用了几种急性心肌梗死 (MI) 的二进制分类系统,这有助于改善患者管理。相反,对于心肌缺血的慢性稳定表现,随着时间的推移出现了各种分类,术语往往存在冲突,例如“稳定型冠状动脉疾病”(CAD)、“稳定型缺血性心脏病”和“慢性冠状动脉综合征”(CCS)。虽然 2019 年欧洲指南引入了 CCS,以与“急性冠状动脉综合征”(ACS)保持对称,但 2023 年美国指南认可了替代术语“慢性冠状动脉疾病”。这些相互竞争的分类的一个意外后果是,限制词“冠状动脉”和“疾病”的持续存在,通常仅暗示单一的阻塞性 CAD 机制。现在重要的是要为心绞痛和心肌缺血的阻塞性和非阻塞性原因推进更广泛的包容性术语,这有助于概念清晰并统一指南之间不同的命名法。因此,我们提出了一种新的急性心肌缺血综合征和非急性心肌缺血综合征的二进制分类,它包含了阻塞性心外膜和非阻塞性发病机制,包括微血管功能障碍、血管痉挛性疾病和非冠状动脉原因。在此,我们保留了 ACS、ST 段抬高型心肌梗死和非 ST 段抬高型心肌梗死的公认类别,这些类别是经证实具有临床益处的重要亚组,以及缺血和非阻塞性冠状动脉的心肌梗死等新术语。总的来说,这种更全面的命名法更好地协调、统一和协调了心肌缺血的不同病理生理原因,应该会导致针对心绞痛、缺血和梗死的多种病理生物学诱因的更精细的诊断和治疗方法。