Why the study?
The role of PCI compared to optimal medical therapy in managing myocardial bridging remains uncertain.
Does percutaneous coronary intervention improve in-hospital outcomes compared to medical therapy in patients aged 18 or older with myocardial bridging?
Does percutaneous coronary intervention improve in-hospital outcomes compared to medical therapy in patients aged 18 or older with myocardial bridging?
In patients with myocardial bridging, PCI does not improve in-hospital mortality compared to medical therapy and is associated with increased risks of cardiogenic shock and need for mechanical circulatory support.
PCI may increase shock and MCS needs without mortality benefit in myocardial bridging; hypothesis-generating and requires randomized trials.
Myocardial Bridging (MB) is typically a benign congenital coronary anomaly. MB can infrequently result in complications such as myocardial ischemia, arrhythmias, and sudden cardiac death. Recent studies suggest an underlying genetic component for MB involving DES, FBN1, SCN2B, or NOTCH1. The role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in managing MB, compared to optimal medical therapy (OMT), remains uncertain. Our study used the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) Database to identify patients aged 18 or older with myocardial bridging who were managed with PCI versus medical therapy. We compared the outcomes between both groups including in-hospital mortality, the trend of management of MB and other in-hospital outcomes or complications. Our results showed no statistically significant difference between both subgroups when comparing in-hospital mortality and secondary outcomes of cardiac arrest and the development of an acute kidney injury (AKI). Patients with myocardial bridging treated with PCI had a higher risk of developing cardiogenic shock, requiring LVAD, and requiring the use of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) compared to the medical therapy subgroup. Our study suggests the decision to perform PCI in myocardial bridging patients should be individualized such as in patients with refractory symptoms despite medical therapy or those with known high-risk features.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Krittanawong et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: