To the Editor We read with interest ‘Impact of cardiologist evaluation on mortality in myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery’. Park et al 1 presented data from a retrospective study of adult patients classified as myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS), divided into two groups based on whether evaluation by a cardiologist (consultation or transfer to the cardiology ward) occurred or not. The key finding was that patients evaluated by a cardiologist had better 30-day overall survival compared with no evaluation by a cardiologist. We are concerned that several important limitations in the methodology and conduct may have led to inappropriate conclusions. May we kindly ask the authors to provide some additional information that will help the readers to better put their findings into clinical perspective. First, cardiac troponin (cTn) was not measured systematically in the preoperative period, thus we are concerned that in many …

中文翻译：

---

Park等人关于“心脏病专家评估与非心脏手术后心肌损伤死亡率之间的关联”的对应关系

致编辑 我们感兴趣地阅读了“心脏病专家评估对非心脏手术后心肌损伤死亡率的影响”。Park 等人 1 提供了一项回顾性研究的数据，该研究对非心脏手术 (MINS) 后归类为心肌损伤的成年患者进行了回顾性研究，根据是否发生心脏病专家的评估（会诊或转移到心脏病病房）分为两组。关键发现是，由心脏病专家评估的患者与未接受心脏病专家评估的患者相比，30 天总生存期更好。我们担心方法和行为中的几个重要限制可能导致不恰当的结论。我们恳请作者提供一些额外的信息，以帮助读者更好地将他们的发现纳入临床观点。第一的，