scholarly journals Survival in Patients With Suspected Myocardial Infarction With Nonobstructive Coronary Arteries: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis From the MINOCA Global Collaboration

Author(s):  
Sivabaskari Pasupathy ◽  
Bertil Lindahl ◽  
Peter Litwin ◽  
Rosanna Tavella ◽  
Michael J.A. Williams ◽  
...  

Background: Suspected myocardial infarction (MI) with nonobstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) occurs in ≈5% to 10% of patients with MI referred for coronary angiography. The prognosis of these patients may differ to those with MI and obstructive coronary artery disease (MI-CAD) and those without a MI (patients without known history of MI [No-MI]). The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the 12-month all-cause mortality of patients with MINOCA. Methods: Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, the terms “MI,” “nonobstructive,” “angiography,” and “prognosis” were searched in PubMed and Embase databases from inception to December 2018, including original, English language MINOCA studies with >100 consecutive patients. Publications with a heterogeneous cohort, unreported coronary stenosis, or exclusively focusing on MINOCA-mimicking conditions, were excluded. Unpublished data were obtained from the MINOCA Global Collaboration. Data were pooled and analyzed using Paule-Mandel, Hartung, Knapp, Sidik & Jonkman, or restricted maximum-likelihood random-effects meta-analysis methodology. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran’s Q and I 2 statistics. The primary outcome was 12-month all-cause mortality in patients with MINOCA, with secondary comparisons to MI-CAD and No-MI. Results: The 23 eligible studies yielded 55 369 suspected MINOCA, 485 382 MI-CAD, and 33 074 No-MI. Pooled meta-analysis of 14 MINOCA studies accounting for 30 733 patients revealed an unadjusted 12-month all-cause mortality rate of 3.4% (95% CI, 2.6%–4.2%) and reinfarction (n=27 605; 10 studies) in 2.6% (95% CI, 1.7%–3.5%). MINOCA had a lower 12-month all-cause mortality than those with MI-CAD (3.3% [95% CI, 2.5%–4.1%] versus 5.6% [95% CI, 4.1%–7.0%]; odds ratio, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.52–0.70], P <0.001). In contrast, there was a statistically nonsignificant trend towards increased 12-month all-cause mortality in patients with MINOCA (2.6% [95% CI, 0%–5.9%]) compared with No-MI (0.7% [95% CI, 0.1%–1.3%]; odds ratio, 3.71 [95% CI, 0.58–23.61], P =0.09). Conclusions: In the largest contemporary MINOCA meta-analysis to date, patients with suspected MINOCA had a favorable prognosis compared with MI-CAD, but statistically nonsignificant trend toward worse outcomes compared to those with No-MI. Registration: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ ; Unique identifier: CRD42020145356.

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 2779
Author(s):  
Pawel Gasior ◽  
Aneta Desperak ◽  
Marek Gierlotka ◽  
Krzysztof Milewski ◽  
Krystian Wita ◽  
...  

Background: Diagnosis of myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) requires both clinical evidence of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and demonstration of non-obstructive coronary arteries using angiography. We compared the clinical features, treatments, and three-year outcomes in patients with MINOCA and myocardial infarction with obstructive coronary artery disease (MI-CAD). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data for 205,606 hospitalized patients with AMI. MINOCA was indicated as a working diagnosis in 6063 patients (2.94% of all AMI patients). For the control group we included 160,886 patients with MI-CAD. We evaluated the baseline characteristics, medication management options, outcomes, and readmission causes at 36 months follow-up. Results: Patients in the MINOCA group were younger. Females constituted a greater proportion of patients in the MINOCA group when compared to MI-CAD patients. STEMI during admission was diagnosed less frequently in the MINOCA group when compared to the MI-CAD group. All-cause mortality at 12 months was higher in the MINOCA group (10.94% vs. 9.54%, p < 0.001). At 36 months, there was no difference in the all-cause mortality rates (MINOCA 16.18% vs. MI-CAD 14.93%, p = 0.081). All-cause readmission rates were lower in the MINOCA group when compared to the MI-CAD group at both 12 months (45.19% vs. 54.33%, p < 0.001) and 36 months follow-up (56.42% vs. 66.66%, p < 0.001). Conclusions: This is the first description of the clinical features, treatments, and three-year outcomes in a large population of Polish patients. The main finding of this study was a relatively low rate of MINOCA, with high rates of adverse events both at 12 and 36 months follow-up.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-17
Author(s):  
Conor Judge ◽  
Sarah Ruttledge ◽  
Robert Murphy ◽  
Elaine Loughlin ◽  
Sarah Gorey ◽  
...  

Background The benefits of aspirin for primary prevention of stroke are uncertain. Methods We performed a cumulative meta-analysis of trials investigating aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with a focus on stroke. We assessed the effects of aspirin on non-fatal stroke, hemorrhagic stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, major gastrointestinal bleeding, and an analysis of net clinical effect, in populations without a history of clinical or subclinical cardiovascular disease. Summary of review results Among 11 trials (157,054 participants), aspirin was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in non-fatal stroke (odds ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.04) but was associated with an increased risk of hemorrhagic stroke (odds ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.56). Aspirin was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in all-cause mortality (odds ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.92 to 1.03) or cardiovascular mortality (odds ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.03). Aspirin was associated with a reduction in non-fatal myocardial infarction (odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.94) and an increased risk of major gastrointestinal bleeding (odds ratio, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.43 to 2.35). Using equal weighting for non-fatal events and major bleeding, we observed no net clinical benefit with aspirin use for primary prevention. Conclusion Our meta-analysis reports no benefit of aspirin for primary stroke prevention.


2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
S Pasupathy ◽  
B Lindahl ◽  
P Litwin ◽  
R Tavella ◽  
M Williams ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Myocardial Infarction (MI) with Non-Obstructive Coronary Arteries (MINOCA) is now a recognised MI subtype. A 2013 systematic review of MINOCA literature indicated that MINOCA prognosis is favourable compared to those with MI and obstructive coronary artery disease (MICAD), but healthy controls were not included. With the growth of recent literature and evaluation of MINOCA prognosis, we performed an in-depth analysis of MINOCA prognosis, in relation to 1-year all-cause mortality and 1-year re-infarction compared with MICAD patients and a healthy cohort. Methods An unrestricted literature search was conducted on the terms “MI”, “non-obstructive”, “angiography” and “prognosis” using PubMed and Embase. Publications with non-consecutive recruitment, less than 100 MINOCA patients or selection bias (i.e. restricted age group) were excluded. MINOCA & MICAD were defined as the presence of an MI (as per the universal criteria) in the absence & presence of CAD (i.e. epicardial vessel with a stenosis ≥50% on angiography), respectively. The healthy cohort was defined as those with no history of cardiovascular diseases. Unpublished data were accumulated via the MINOCA Global Collaboration. Data from the included studies were pooled and analysed using DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q and I2 statistics. Odds ratios (ORs), mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for proportion and continuous data respectively. Results The search identified 2889 unique publications, of which 27 included prognosis data. Of the 563660 consecutive MI patients, the overall pooled prevalence of MINOCA wasat 8.7% (95% CI: 7.5%-9.9%). The 1-year mortality and 1-year re-infarction data by diagnosis are presented in the table. Prognosis comparison by diagnosis MINOCA (n=41658) MINOCA vs MICAD MINOCA vs Healthy % (95% CI) MINOCA (n=16642) MICAD (n=174461) Mean difference or OR 95% CI MINOCA (n=8465) Healthy (n=33074) Mean difference or OR 95% CI Years or % (95% CI) Years or % (95% CI) Years or % (95% CI) Years or % (95% CI) Age 61 (60–62) 61 (59–63) 64 (63–66) 3.2 (2.2–4.2) 62 (57–66) 60 (58–63) 1.6 (−5–8.6) Female 51 (48–53) 51 (48–55) 28 (26–30) 2.8 (2.5–3.1) 56 (48–64) 38 (24–52) 2.2 (1.3–3.7) 1 year mortality 3.4 (2.9–4) 3.4 (2.9–3.9) 5.5 (4.7–6.2) 0.6 (0.5–0.7) 2.6 (1.2–4) 0.7 (0.5–1) 3.7 (1.7–8.2) 1 year Re-MI 2.7 (2.1–3.3) 2.8 (1.8–3.7) 5.7 (3.9–7.5) 0.5 (0.4–0.7) 3.5 (0–7) 0.3 (0–0.6) 14.1 (9.5–21.2) Conclusions This pooled analysis shows that MINOCA accounts for almost one in ten MI presentations. The risks of re-infarction and death among MINOCA patients are much higher than in healthy controls, but lower than for MICAD patients. Efforts are needed to improve understanding of the optimal management and secondary prevention strategies in this unique and heterogeneous population.


2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
RA Montone ◽  
F Gurgoglione ◽  
MG Del Buono ◽  
MC Meucci ◽  
G Iannaccone ◽  
...  

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Background Myocardial bridging (MB) is associated with endothelial dysfunction and may represent a cause of angina in patients with non-obstructive coronary artery disease (NOCAD). Purpose  Herein, we assessed the interplay between MB and coronary vasomotor disorders, evaluating also their prognostic relevance in patients with myocardial infarction and non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) or stable NOCAD. Methods We prospectively enrolled consecutive NOCAD patients undergoing intracoronary acetylcholine provocative test to assess the presence of epicardial or microvascular spasm in patients with suspected angina or MINOCA. Myocardial bridging was diagnosed by coronary angiography. The incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of cardiac death, non-fatal MI and rehospitalisation for unstable angina, was assessed at follow-up. We also assessed angina status using Seattle Angina Questionnaires (SAQ). Results We enrolled 310 patients (mean age 60.6 ± 11.9; 136 [43.9%] men; 169 [54.5%] stable NOCAD and 141 [45.5%] MINOCA). MB was found in 53 (17.1%) patients. MB was an independent predictor of spasm and MINOCA (p &lt; 0.05). At follow-up (median 22 months, interquartile range [13-32]), patients with MB had a higher rate of MACE and a lower SAQ score (all p &lt; 0.001) compared with patients without MB. The rate of MACE was considerably higher in patients with both spasm and MB than in the remaining patients (12/42 [28.6%] vs. 13/268 [4.8%], p &lt; 0.001). Conclusion Among patients with NOCAD coronary spasm associated with MB predicts a worse clinical presentation with MINOCA and a worse clinical outcome at medium-long term follow-up, thus identifying a high-risk subset of patients with MB with relevant therapeutic implications. MB and clinical outcomesCharacteristicsOverall population(n= 310)Presence of Myocardial bridging(n= 53)Absence of Myocardial bridging(n = 257)p valueMACE [n, (%)]25 (8.1)12 (22.6)13 (5.1)&lt;0.001CV Death [n, (%)]1 (0.3)0 (0.0)1 (0.4)0.649MI occurrence [n, (%)]6 (1.9)2 (3.8)4 (1.6)0.286Hospitalization for unstable angina [n, (%)]18 (5.8)10 (18.9)8 (3.1)&lt; 0.001Recurrent angina [n, (%)]70 (22.6)20 (37.7)50 (19.4)0.004SAQ [median (IQR)]82 [78; 88]78 [68; 84]84 [78; 88]&lt; 0.001Follow-up time [months, median (IQR)]22 [15;32]20 [15; 28]23 [15; 34]0.10CV Cardiovascular; MI: Myocardial Infarction; IQR: InterQuartile Range; MACE: Major Adverse Cardiovascular Event; SAQ: Seattle Angina Questionnaire.Abstract Figure Outcomes


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 1759720X2098121
Author(s):  
Gustavo Constantino de Campos ◽  
Raman Mundi ◽  
Craig Whittington ◽  
Marie-Josée Toutounji ◽  
Wilson Ngai ◽  
...  

Aims: The objective of this review was to examine the relationship between osteoarthritis (OA) and mobility-related comorbidities, specifically diabetes mellitus (DM) and cardiovascular disease (CVD). It also investigated the relationship between OA and mortality. Methods: An overview of meta-analyses was conducted by performing two targeted searches from inception to June 2020. The association between OA and (i) DM or CVD ( via PubMed and Embase); and (ii) mortality ( via PubMed) was investigated. Meta-analyses were selected if they included studies that examined adults with OA at any site and reported associations between OA and DM, CVD, or mortality. Evidence was synthesized qualitatively. Results: Six meta-analyses met inclusion criteria. One meta-analysis of 20 studies demonstrated a statistically significant association between OA and DM, with pooled odds ratio of 1.41 (95% confidence interval: 1.21, 1.65; n = 1,040,175 patients). One meta-analysis of 15 studies demonstrated significantly increased risk of CVD among OA patients, with a pooled risk ratio of 1.24 (1.12, 1.37, n = 358,944 patients). Stratified by type of CVD, OA was shown to be associated with increased heart failure (HF) and ischemic heart disease (IHD) and reduced transient ischemic attack (TIA). There was no association reported for stroke or myocardial infarction (MI). Three meta-analyses did not find a significant association between OA (any site) and all-cause mortality. However, OA was found to be significantly associated with cardiovascular-related death across two meta-analyses. Conclusion: The identified meta-analyses reported significantly increased risk of both DM and CVD (particularly, HF and IHD) among OA patients. It was not possible to confirm consistent directional or causal relationships. OA was found to be associated with increased mortality, but mostly in relation to CVD-related mortality, suggesting that further study is warranted in this area.


Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ara H Rostomian ◽  
Derek Q Phan ◽  
Mingsum Lee ◽  
Ray X Zadegan

Introduction: Myocardial Infarction with non-obstructive coronary artery disease (MINOCA) is found in 5%-6% of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). As such, the diagnosis and management of AMI patients with non-obstructive coronary artery disease (NOCAD) poses a challenge as compared to patients with MI with coronary artery disease (MICAD). Hypothesis: To evaluate the characteristics and outcomes of MINOCA in older patients as compared with MICAD patients, with and without revascularization. Methods: This was a retrospective observational study of patients ≥80 years old who underwent invasive coronary angiography (ICA) for AMI between 2009-2019 at Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center. MINOCA was defied as <50% stenosis of coronary arteries on angiography with a troponin level ≥0.05 ng/ml. Patients with MINOCA vs MICAD were compared. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of MINOCA and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to analyze all-cause mortality between cohorts. Results: A total of 259 patients with MINOCA (mean ± SD age 83.8±2.7 years, 68% female) and 687 patients with MICAD (84.7±3.4 years, 40% female) were analyzed. Younger age (odds ratio [OR]=1.11; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.05-1.18), female sex (OR=3.14; CI=2.20-4.48), black race (OR=2.53; CI=1.61-3.98), no history of prior stroke (OR=1.56; CI=1.06-2.33), atrial fibrillation or flutter (OR=2.04; CI:1.38-3.02), lower troponin levels (OR=1.08; CI:1.03-1.11), and lower triglyceride levels per 10 mg/dl increments (OR=1.06; CI:1.03-1.11) increased the odds of having MINCOA as compared to MICAD. At median follow-up of 2.4 years, MINOCA was associated with a lower rate of death (44.8% vs 55.2%, p<0.01) compared to un-revascularized MICAD, but no difference (31.3% vs 40.4%, p=0.68) when compared to re-vascularized MICAD. Conclusions: Patients age ≥80 years with MINOCA have fewer traditional risk factors compared to their counterparts with MICAD and fewer deaths compared to un-revascularized MICAD, but similar mortality compared to revascularized MICAD


2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahab Hajibandeh ◽  
Shahin Hajibandeh

Abstract Aims to evaluate prognostic significance of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in patients undergoing carotid artery revascularisation. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed in compliance with PRISMA standards to evaluate prognostic significance of MetS in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy or carotid stenting. Short-term (&lt;30 days) postoperative outcomes (all-cause mortality, stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA), myocardial infarction, major adverse events) and long-term outcomes (restenosis, all-cause mortality, stroke or TIA, myocardial infarction, major adverse events) were considered as outcomes of interest. Random effects modelling was applied for the analyses. Results Analysis of 3721 patients from five cohort studies showed no difference between the MetS and no MetS groups in terms of the following short-term outcomes: all-cause mortality (OR: 1.67,P=0.32), stroke or TIA (OR: 2.44,P=0.06), myocardial infarction (OR: 1.01,P=0.96), major adverse events (OR: 1.23, P = 0.66). In terms of long-term outcomes, MetS was associated with higher risk of restenosis (OR: 1.75,P=0.02), myocardial infarction (OR: 2.12,P=0.04), and major adverse events (OR: 1.30, P = 0.009) but there was no difference between the two groups in terms of all-cause mortality (OR: 1.11, P = 0.25), and stroke or TIA (OR: 1.24, P = 0.33). The quality and certainty of the available evidence were judged to be moderate. Conclusions The best available evidence suggest that although MetS may not affect the short-term postoperative morbidity and mortality outcomes in patients undergoing carotid revascularisation, it may result in higher risks of restenosis, myocardial infarction and major adverse events in the long-term. Evidence from large prospective cohort studies are required for more robust conclusions.


Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anda Bularga ◽  
Mohammed Meah ◽  
Dimitrios Doudesis ◽  
Anoop S Shah ◽  
Nicholas L Mills ◽  
...  

Introduction: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is the cornerstone of pharmacological treatment for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and in those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for stable coronary disease. Despite widespread use, the optimal duration of DAPT remains uncertain. We present an updated meta-analysis comparing outcomes in short-term DAPT (≤ 6 months) versus long-term DAPT (≥ 12 months). Methods: Four major databases were searched for randomised controlled trials of interest. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary safety outcomes included any bleeding and major bleeding. Efficacy outcomes included cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, coronary revascularization and thrombotic stroke. Further subgroup analysis stratified by index presentation and a sensitivity analysis to evaluate shorter duration DAPT (≤3 months) was performed. Results: Nineteen randomised controlled trials were included (n=60,879) of which 8 compared shorter duration DAPT (≤3 months) with standard duration (12 months) (n=38,036). Short-term DAPT was associated with an apparent modest increase in myocardial infarction (risk ratio [RR] 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.22) with a major reduction in bleeding (RR 0.68; 95% CI, 0.55-0.83) for major bleeding and (RR 0.66; 95% CI, 0.56-0.77 for any bleeding) and an overall apparent reduction in all-cause mortality (RR 0.90; 95% CI 0.81-1.01). These associations persisted when comparing shorter duration DAPT to standard duration. Subgroup analysis of patients with stable disease or ACS identified no significant heterogenicity in efficacy, safety or mortality outcomes. Conclusion: In the largest meta-analysis to date comparing duration of DAPT, we show that short (≤ 6 months) and shorter (≤ 3 months) DAPT is associated with continuing trends for small reductions in all-cause mortality irrespective of index presentation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document