Provides expert consensus recommendations for determining eligibility and disqualification for competitive athletes with coronary artery disease.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Offers consensus guidance for athlete eligibility decisions in CAD; leaves open the need for trials to strengthen future recommendations.
A therosclerotic coronary artery disease (ASCAD) is the leading cause of sudden cardiac death (SCD) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in adult athletes, variously defined as people older than age 30, 35, or 40 years. 1 ASCAD can occur in younger athletes who have inherited hyperlipidemia. For many adults, SCD or AMI is the first manifestation of ASCAD, because most of these acute events are caused by coronary plaque disruption and acute coronary thrombosis in plaques that were previously not sufficiently narrowed to have caused ischemia, even during intense exercise. 1 There is universal agreement that vigorous exercise, such as athletic competition, acutely, albeit transiently, increases the risk of SCD and AMI in previously healthy people. 1 Vigorous exercise also transiently increases the risk for SCD and AMI in people with diagnosed ASCAD. These events may be caused by plaque disruption, but SCD in these patients may also be produced by malignant arrhythmias caused by demand ischemia or originating in areas of myocardial scar. The present section makes recommendations on how to evaluate patients with disease of the coronary arteries and make appropriate recommendations for athletic competition. Anomalous coronary arteries are considered in the Task Force 4 report. e searched PubMed for English language articles reporting exercise-related issues related to coronary diseases. This search produced no clinical trials examining how competitive athletes with coronary artery diseases should be advised regarding vigorous exercise in general or athletic competition in particular. Consequently, the following recommendations are based on case series, case reports, and consensus among the committee members.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Thompson et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: