Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 3 complete abstracts (851 words), 9 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
A clinical syndrome defined by myocardial ischemia symptoms; persistent elevation in the ST segments of the electrocardiogram; and release of biomarkers of myocardial necrosis (e.g., elevated troponin levels). ST segment elevation in the ECG is often used in determining the treatment protocol (see also non-st elevation myocardial infarction).
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: STEMI; ST Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction; ST Elevated Myocardial Infarction.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Myocardial Infarction
Related concepts
- Myocardial Ischemia
- Electrocardiogram
- Biomarkers
- Necrosis
- Troponin
- Non-St Elevation Myocardial Infarction
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 9,917 records tagged with the MeSH heading “ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction” (counts retrieved 2026-10-29). 6,175 of them (62.3%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is 2020 onward with 6,175 records.
Reviews account for 830 records (8.4%) and meta-analyses for 328. Randomized controlled trials number 712 (7.2%) as a share of all records on the topic.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 0 |
| 2000-2009 | 0 |
| 2010-2019 | 3,954 |
| 2020 onward | 6,175 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 830 | 8.4% |
| Meta-analyses | 328 | 3.3% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 712 | 7.2% |
Method: PubMed query "ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-29.
Reading the evidence in cardiovascular medicine
Cardiovascular medicine has an unusually large body of randomized trials, so the type of outcome matters: hard clinical events such as death, heart attack and stroke carry more weight than changes in blood pressure, cholesterol or imaging markers that only predict risk. Observational studies can show associations but are confounded by age, lifestyle and other illness. Check whether a result is about prevention or treatment, the baseline risk of participants, and the absolute rather than only the relative size of any benefit.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
| Study / authors | Year | Source label / design | Europe PMC citations | Licence / source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex differences in management and outcomes of people with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, New South Wales, 2011-2020: a retrospective cohort study | 2025 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 9 | cc by PMID 40964767 · DOI · PMC12502883 |
| DanGer shock criteria and outcomes in acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock treated with Impella: the J-PVAD registry | 2026 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 8 | cc by PMID 41078250 · DOI · PMC12831186 |
| Heparin administration at first medical contact vs immediately before primary percutaneous coronary intervention: the HELP-PCI trial | 2025 | Randomized controlled trial Design not recorded in structured metadata | 8 | cc by PMID 40748607 · DOI · PMC12517749 |
Sex differences in management and outcomes of people with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, New South Wales, 2011-2020: a retrospective cohort study [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- ObjectivesTo examine whether sex differences in cardiovascular disease care and outcomes for people hospitalised with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in New South Wales have declined during 2011-2020.
- Closing excerpt
- Sex differences in treatment and outcomes for people with STEMI are declining but will not be eliminated during the next ten years.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (381 words)
ObjectivesTo examine whether sex differences in cardiovascular disease care and outcomes for people hospitalised with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in New South Wales have declined during 2011-2020.Study designRetrospective cohort study; analysis of linked New South Wales Admitted Patient Data Collection and Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages data.Setting, participantsAdults (18 years or older) admitted to public or private hospitals in New South Wales with STEMI for the first time during 1 January 2011 - 31 December 2020.Major outcome measuresProportions of people who received coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within seven days of first STEMI admission, by year and sex; proportions of STEMI admissions followed by major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) or death (any cause) within twelve months, by year and sex; rate of change in these parameters, adjusted for age group, intensive care unit admission, and Charlson Comorbidity Index score.ResultsWe identified 29 435 initial STEMI hospital admissions during 2011-2020; the mean age at admission was 66.1 years (standard deviation, 14.2 years), 8475 patients were women (28.8%) and 20 960 were men (71.2%). The proportions of female patients who underwent angiography (71.9% v 85.1%) or PCI (54.4% v 70.0%) were smaller than those of male patients. During 2011-2020, the increase in the angiography proportion was greater for female than for male patients (2.7 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 2.5-2.9] v 1.5 [95% CI, 1.4-1.6] percentage points per year), as was the change in PCI proportion (3.2 [95% CI, 2.9-3.6] v 2.5 [95% CI, 2.3-2.7] percentage points per year). The proportions of admissions followed by MACE (18.4% v 15.0%) or death of any cause (14.7% v 8.5%) were larger for female than male patients. The decline in the MACE proportion during 2011-2020 was similar for female and male patients (0.8 [95% CI, 0.5-1.1] v 0.5 [95% CI, 0.3-0.7] percentage points per year); the decline in all-cause mortality was greater for female than male patients (1.0 [95% CI, 0.8-1.1] v 0.6 [95% CI, 0.5-0.7] percentage points per year).ConclusionThe increase in the proportions of patients with STEMI who underwent timely angiography and PCI was more rapid during 2011-2020 for female than male patients, and the decline in all-cause mortality was also greater. Sex differences in treatment and outcomes for people with STEMI are declining but will not be eliminated during the next ten years.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 40964767 · DOI · PMC12502883
DanGer shock criteria and outcomes in acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock treated with Impella: the J-PVAD registry [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Background and aimsThe DanGer shock trial showed a survival benefit of Impella in highly selected patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS).
- Closing excerpt
- Outcomes in non-eligible subgroups were heterogeneous, highlighting the importance of individualized risk assessment in guiding Impella use in real-world practice.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (214 words)
Background and aimsThe DanGer shock trial showed a survival benefit of Impella in highly selected patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (STEMI-CS). In real-world settings, however, Impella is often used in broader populations not meeting trial criteria. This study aimed to assess the distribution and outcomes of DanGer shock-eligible and -ineligible acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) patients in a nationwide Japanese registry.MethodsA total of 3975 AMI-CS patients treated with Impella between 2020 and 2023 were identified from the J-PVAD registry. Patients were stratified into five groups: eligible STEMI-CS, non-eligible STEMI-CS, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA), mechanical complications (MCs), and non-STEMI-CS (NSTEMI-CS). Eligible STEMI-CS was defined as STEMI-CS fulfilling all of the following: lactate ≥ 2.5 mmol/L, systolic blood pressure ResultsEligible STEMI-CS accounted for 35.6% of all AMI-CS cases, with a 30-day mortality of 37.6%. Non-eligible STEMI-CS patients had lower mortality (27.6%), but it increased significantly with advanced age, renal dysfunction, veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation use, ventricular arrhythmia, or sepsis. Thirty-day mortality was 51.3% in OHCA (63.4% without return of spontaneous circulation), 39.8% in MC, and 33.3% in NSTEMI-CS groups.ConclusionsIn this nationwide registry, one-third of AMI-CS patients treated with Impella met DanGer shock criteria. Outcomes in non-eligible subgroups were heterogeneous, highlighting the importance of individualized risk assessment in guiding Impella use in real-world practice.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41078250 · DOI · PMC12831186
Heparin administration at first medical contact vs immediately before primary percutaneous coronary intervention: the HELP-PCI trial [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Background and aimsThe beneficial effect of pre-treatment with unfractionated heparin (UFH) at first medical contact (FMC) before primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) in all-comers with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains uncertain.
- Closing excerpt
- ConclusionsPre-treatment with loading-dose UFH at FMC was associated with an improvement of spontaneous reperfusion of IRA without increasing the risk of major bleeding.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (256 words)
Background and aimsThe beneficial effect of pre-treatment with unfractionated heparin (UFH) at first medical contact (FMC) before primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) in all-comers with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains uncertain.MethodsHELP-PCI was an investigator-initiated, randomized controlled trial conducted at 36 clinical centres in China. Patients with STEMI presenting ≤12 h after symptom onset undergoing PPCI were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous administration with UFH (100 U/kg) at FMC or in the Cath Lab through a catheter sheath. The primary endpoint was Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow grade (TFG)-3 of infarct-related artery (IRA) at diagnostic angiography before PPCI. The secondary outcome was complete epicardial and myocardial reperfusion after PPCI and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; defined as the composite of all-cause death, cardiac death, heart failure hospitalizations, re-infarction, stent thrombosis, unplanned revascularization, and stroke) at 12 months. Safety outcome was 30-day Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type ≥2 bleeding.ResultsA total of 999 patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI were randomly assigned to receive either UFH administration at FMC (n = 505) or in the Cath Lab (n = 494). Pre-treated population at FMC showed a higher frequency of TFG-3 of IRA compared with the Cath Lab group (23.6% vs 17.6%; odds ratio, 1.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.97; P = .02). There were no significant differences in secondary endpoints or in the safety endpoint, including 12-month MACCE, complete epicardial and myocardial reperfusion, and major bleeding.ConclusionsPre-treatment with loading-dose UFH at FMC was associated with an improvement of spontaneous reperfusion of IRA without increasing the risk of major bleeding.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 40748607 · DOI · PMC12517749
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: An Individual Patient Meta-Analysis: Thrombectomy Trialists Collaboration [4]
- Research article Coronary microvascular obstruction and dysfunction in patients with acute myocardial infarction [5]
- Research article Complete vs Culprit-Lesion-Only Revascularization for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis [6]
- Research article Coronary intervention door-to-balloon time and outcomes in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis [7]
- Research article Arrhythmias After Acute Myocardial Infarction [8]
- Research article Complete revascularization reduces cardiovascular death in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials [9]
References
- Kazi S, Marschner S, Min H, Quintans D, Chong JJ, Khan E, et al.. Sex differences in management and outcomes of people with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, New South Wales, 2011-2020: a retrospective cohort study. . 2025. PMID 40964767 · DOI · PMC12502883
- Arai R, Kojima K, Fukamachi D, Okumura Y. DanGer shock criteria and outcomes in acute myocardial infarction-related cardiogenic shock treated with Impella: the J-PVAD registry. . 2026. PMID 41078250 · DOI · PMC12831186
- Chen J, Xu C, Qiu L, Li B, Yao W, Wu H, et al.. Heparin administration at first medical contact vs immediately before primary percutaneous coronary intervention: the HELP-PCI trial. . 2025. PMID 40748607 · DOI · PMC12517749
- Jolly SS, James S, Džavík V, Cairns JA, Mahmoud KD, Zijlstra F, et al.. Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: An Individual Patient Meta-Analysis: Thrombectomy Trialists Collaboration. Circulation. 2017. PMID 27941066 · DOI
- Galli M, Niccoli G, De Maria G, Brugaletta S, Montone RA, Vergallo R, et al.. Coronary microvascular obstruction and dysfunction in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2024. PMID 38001231 · DOI
- Bainey KR, Engstrøm T, Smits PC, Gershlick AH, James SK, Storey RF, et al.. Complete vs Culprit-Lesion-Only Revascularization for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Cardiol. 2020. PMID 32432651 · DOI · PMC7240651
- Foo CY, Bonsu KO, Nallamothu BK, Reid CM, Dhippayom T, Reidpath DD, et al.. Coronary intervention door-to-balloon time and outcomes in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis. Heart. 2018. PMID 29437704 · DOI
- Frampton J, Ortengren AR, Zeitler EP. Arrhythmias After Acute Myocardial Infarction. Yale J Biol Med. 2023. PMID 37009192 · DOI · PMC10052595
- Pavasini R, Biscaglia S, Barbato E, Tebaldi M, Dudek D, Escaned J, et al.. Complete revascularization reduces cardiovascular death in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Eur Heart J. 2020. PMID 31891653 · DOI
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-10-29.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.