Key result
SCAD shows comparable in-hospital and follow-up event rates to atherosclerotic coronary dissection.
Why the study?
A comparison between atherosclerotic coronary plaque dissection and spontaneous coronary artery dissection had not been previously addressed in the literature.
Do in-hospital and follow-up events differ between patients with spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) and atherosclerotic coronary plaque dissection (ACPD)?
Observational (n=131)
Yes
Do in-hospital and follow-up events differ between patients with spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) and atherosclerotic coronary plaque dissection (ACPD)?
p-value: p=0.25
Despite differing pathophysiology and baseline risk profiles, patients with SCAD and ACPD have comparable in-hospital and follow-up event rates.
May support similar acute management for SCAD and ACPD; leaves open prospective trials on tailored long-term strategies.
BACKGROUND: Atherosclerotic coronary plaque dissection (ACPD) is one cause of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) caused by underlying atherosclerosis. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) occurs outside the setting of atherosclerosis among young women and individuals with few or no conventional atherosclerotic risk factors, and has emerged as an important cause of ACS, and sudden death. A comparison between ACPD and SCAD has not been previously addressed in the literature. Our study will compare ACPD and SCAD. METHODS: Patients with confirmed diagnosis of SCAD and ACPD were retrospectively identified from 30 centers in 4 Arab Gulf countries between January 2011 and December 2017. In-hospital (ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation, myocardial infarction (MI), percutaneous coronary intervention, dissection extension, cardiogenic shock, death, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator placement) and follow-up (MI, de novo SCAD, spontaneous superior mesenteric artery dissection, death) events were compared between them. RESULTS: Eighty-three cases of SCAD and 48 ACPD were compared. ACPD patients were more frequently male (91.67% vs. 49.40%, P < 0.001) and older (58.5 vs. 44, P < 0.001). Cardiovascular risk factors were more prevalent in patients with ACPD, including diabetes mellitus (60.4% vs. 25.3%), dyslipidemia (62.5% vs. 38.5%), and hypertension (62.5% vs. 31.3%), P < 0.001. Hospital presentation of ST-elevation MI was diagnosed in 48% of SCAD versus 27% of ACPD patients (P = 0.012). SCAD patients received medical-only treatment in 40% of cases and ACPD in 21% (P = 0.042). In-hospital and follow-up events were comparable in both groups (P = 0.25). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a completely different pathophysiology of ACS between SCAD and ACPD, in-hospital and follow-up events were comparable.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Daoulah et al. (2020) conducted an observational in Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection and Atherosclerotic Coronary Plaque Dissection (n=131). Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection (SCAD) vs. Atherosclerotic Coronary Plaque Dissection (ACPD) was evaluated on In-hospital and follow-up events (p=0.25). Spontaneous coronary artery dissection was associated with comparable in-hospital and follow-up event rates compared to atherosclerotic coronary plaque dissection (P=0.25).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: