Do traditional clinical risk factors predict major adverse cardiac events and all-cause mortality in patients with MINOCA?
In patients with MINOCA, only select traditional risk factors predict adverse outcomes, with higher BMI and dyslipidemia paradoxically associated with lower mortality, highlighting the need for MINOCA-specific risk models.
BACKGROUND Myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) is a heterogeneous condition with variable outcomes. The prognostic value of common clinical risk factors for major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and all-cause mortality remains unclear. This study systematically evaluates associations between traditional risk factors and adverse outcomes in MINOCA. METHODS A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for clinical variables associated with MACEs and all-cause mortality. Eligible studies reporting HRs with at least 6 months of follow-up were included. Random-effects models were used to derive pooled estimates. RESULTS Eleven studies including 12,081 patients were analyzed. Over a mean follow-up of 49.2 months, pooled MACEs incidence was 17% (95% CI: 11-26%) and all-cause mortality was 10% (95% CI: 8-14%). Older age increased the risk of MACEs (HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.01-1.04), while higher BMI was protective (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.86-0.99). For all-cause mortality, significant predictors included age (HR: 1.04 per year), diabetes (HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.07-1.64), creatinine (HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 1.0009-1.02), and STEMI-pattern presentation (HR: 2.85; 95% CI: 1.09-7.44). Higher BMI (HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.82-0.98) and dyslipidemia (HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.76-0.90) were associated with lower mortality. CONCLUSION Only select clinical variables predict outcomes in MINOCA, while many traditional MI risk factors do not. These findings highlight the need for MINOCA-specific risk models and targeted management strategies.
Chiotis et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: