Why the study?
The difference in long-term outcomes between patients with MINOCA and those with MI-CAD was not clear.
Does MINOCA compared to MI-CAD have a different risk of long-term all-cause mortality in patients with myocardial infarction?
Does MINOCA compared to MI-CAD have a different risk of long-term all-cause mortality in patients with myocardial infarction?
A meta-analysis of adjusted data indicates that patients with MINOCA have a similar long-term all-cause mortality risk compared to those with MI-CAD.
Background The difference in the long-term outcomes of myocardial infarction in patients with non-obstructed coronary arteries (MINOCA) and patients with myocardial infarction with obstructed coronary artery disease (MI-CAD) is not clear. The current study aimed to pool adjusted data to compare long-term outcomes of MINOCA vs MI-CAD. Methods Electronic literature search of PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, and Google Scholar databases was done for publications up to 18th June 2023. Only studies reporting multivariable-adjusted data with > 1 year of follow-up were included. Results Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Our meta-analysis revealed no statistically significant difference in the risk of all-cause mortality between MINOCA and MI-CAD patients (HR: 0.90 95% CI 0.68, 1.19 I 2 = 94% p = 0.48). Analysis of the limited data showed a reduced combined risk of all-cause mortality and MI (HR: 0.54 95% CI 0.39, 0.76 I 2 = 72% p = 0.003) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (HR: 0.66 95% CI 0.51, 0.84 I 2 = 51% p = 0.0009) in patients with MINOCA vs MI-CAD, and no difference in the risk of cardiovascular mortality (HR: 0.81 95% CI 0.54, 1.22 I 2 = 0% p = 0.31) and readmission between the two groups (HR: 0.85 95% CI 0.61, 1.19 I 2 = 90% p = 0.35). Conclusion A pooled analysis of adjusted outcomes from the available studies indicated that MINOCA and MI-CAD patients have similar long-term all-cause mortality risk. Our conclusions on the risk of cardiovascular mortality, MACE and readmission rates need to be taken with caution due to a lack of adequate studies. Further research is needed to strengthen the evidence on this important subject.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lu et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: