Key result
Patients with MINOCA had higher mortality odds than those with single-vessel obstructive ACS (OR 0.70 for SV-ACS, p=0.04) and similar odds to multi-vessel obstructive ACS (OR 0.88, p=0.45).
Why the study?
Evidence was contradictory regarding whether patients with MINOCA have better clinical outcomes than patients with obstructive coronary artery disease.
Does MINOCA alter mortality risk compared to obstructive ACS in patients with acute coronary syndrome?
Cohort (n=7,693)
No
Does MINOCA alter mortality risk compared to obstructive ACS in patients with acute coronary syndrome?
MINOCA is associated with a significant mortality risk that is higher than single-vessel obstructive ACS and similar to multi-vessel obstructive ACS, highlighting the need for adequate treatment and follow-up.
AIMS: Whether patients with MINOCA (myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries) have better outcomes than patients with obstructive coronary artery disease remains contradictory. The current study focussed on the clinical profile and prognosis of MINOCA patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) admitted to the Isala hospital in Zwolle, the Netherlands, between 2006 and 2014. A total of 7693 patients were categorized into three groups: MINOCA, single-vessel obstructive ACS (SV-ACS), and multi-vessel obstructive ACS (MV-ACS). MINOCA patients (5.2% of the total population) were more likely to be female (51.5% vs. 30.3% and 26.0% in SV-ACS and MV-ACS, respectively, p < 0.001 for both). The prevalence of risk factors in the MINOCA group was in between the SV-ACS and MV-ACS groups. Logistic regression revealed a lower odds of dying in SV-ACS (odds ratio (OR) = 0.70 (p = 0.04)) and a similar odds in MV-ACS (OR = 0.88, p = 0.45) compared to MINOCA. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MINOCA show an 'intermediate' risk profile with mortality rates in between those of both ACS groups. Hence, MINOCA should be recognised as a potential risk factor for mortality, requiring adequate treatment and follow-up.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vranken et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in acute coronary syndrome (n=7,693). MINOCA (myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries) vs. Single-vessel obstructive ACS (SV-ACS) and multi-vessel obstructive ACS (MV-ACS) was evaluated on mortality (OR 0.70, p=0.04). Patients with MINOCA had higher mortality odds than those with single-vessel obstructive ACS (OR 0.70 for SV-ACS, p=0.04) and similar odds to multi-vessel obstructive ACS (OR 0.88, p=0.45).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: