Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 6, 2026

A Microscopic 2,3,5-Triphenyltetrazolium Chloride Assay for Accurate and Reliable Analysis of Myocardial Injury
Published on: November 28, 2025
Type 2 myocardial infarction: the chimaera of cardiology?
Paul Collinson1, Bertil Lindahl2
1Departments of Clinical Blood Sciences and Cardiology, St George's Hospital and Medical School, London, UK.
Insights
The term "type 2 myocardial infarction" is vague and lacks evidence-based criteria. Researchers suggest discontinuing its use in favor of "secondary myocardial injury" to better reflect pathophysiology.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Clinical Medicine
- Biomedical Science
Background:
- Type 2 myocardial infarction (T2MI) was introduced to define myocardial damage with elevated troponin but without typical acute myocardial infarction criteria.
- The definition of T2MI has remained vague, often characterized by exclusion rather than positive criteria.
- Clinical studies report inconsistent incidence and associated conditions for T2MI.
Purpose of the Study:
- To critically evaluate the current definition and clinical utility of type 2 myocardial infarction.
- To propose an alternative concept for myocardial injury secondary to other conditions.
Main Methods:
- Review of the existing literature and definitions of type 2 myocardial infarction.
- Analysis of the clinical implications and diagnostic challenges associated with T2MI.
- Conceptual re-evaluation of myocardial injury in non-coronary settings.
Main Results:
- The definition of T2MI is inconsistent and lacks clear diagnostic criteria.
- Disparate incidence rates and varying associated conditions are reported across studies.
- There is a lack of evidence-based treatment guidelines for T2MI.
Conclusions:
- The term type 2 myocardial infarction is confusing and not evidence-based.
- The authors recommend ceasing the use of the term T2MI.
- The concept of secondary myocardial injury is proposed as a more accurate and pathophysiology-based alternative.
Abstract:
The term type 2 myocardial infarction first appeared as part of the universal definition of myocardial infarction. It was introduced to cover a group of patients who had elevation of cardiac troponin but did not meet the traditional criteria for acute myocardial infarction although they were considered to have an underlying ischaemic aetiology for the myocardial damage observed. Since first inception, the term type 2 myocardial infarction has always been vague. Although attempts have been made to produce a systematic definition of what constitutes a type 2 myocardial infarction, it has been more often characterised by what it is not rather than what it is. Clinical studies that have used type 2 myocardial infarction as a diagnostic criterion have produced disparate incidence figures. The range of associated clinical conditions differs from study to study. Additionally, there are no agreed or evidence-based treatment strategies for type 2 myocardial infarction. The authors believe that the term type 2 myocardial infarction is confusing and not evidence-based. They consider that there is good reason to stop using this term and consider instead the concept of secondary myocardial injury that relates to the underlying pathophysiology of the primary clinical condition.
Related Concept Videos
Myocarditis II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests
Myocarditis I: Introduction
Acute Coronary Syndrome II: Pathophysiology and Clinical Manifestations
Angina II: Classification
Acute Coronary Syndrome I: Introduction
Cardiomyopathy I: Introduction and Classification

