PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
January 1, 2021EuroIntervention246 citationsOpen Access

An EAPCI Expert Consensus Document on Ischaemia with Non-Obstructive Coronary Arteries in Collaboration with European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Coronary Pathophysiology & Microcirculation Endorsed by Coronary Vasomotor Disorders International Study Group

View Full Paper
VKVijay KunadianACAlaide ChieffoPCPaolo G. Camici

Structured PICO

P
Population
Patients with Ischaemia with Non-Obstructive Coronary Arteries (INOCA)
I
Intervention
Diagnostic approach and management guidance

This EAPCI expert consensus document establishes a standardized definition and provides clinical guidance for the diagnosis and management of INOCA.

Abstract

This consensus document, a summary of the views of an expert panel organized by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), appraises the importance of ischaemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA). Angina pectoris affects approximately 112 million people globally. Up to 70% of patients undergoing invasive angiography do not have obstructive coronary artery disease, more common in women than in men, and a large proportion have INOCA as a cause of their symptoms. INOCA patients present with a wide spectrum of symptoms and signs that are often misdiagnosed as non-cardiac leading to under-diagnosis/investigation and under-treatment. INOCA can result from heterogeneous mechanism including coronary vasospasm and microvascular dysfunction and is not a benign condition. Compared to asymptomatic individuals, INOCA is associated with increased incidence of cardiovascular events, repeated hospital admissions, as well as impaired quality of life and associated increased health care costs. This consensus document provides a definition of INOCA and guidance to the community on the diagnostic approach and management of INOCA based on existing evidence from research and best available clinical practice; noting gaps in knowledge and potential areas for further investigation.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kunadian et al. (2021) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d9d7e48fbc15f99e68429bhttps://doi.org/10.4244/eijy20m07_01
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Gender differences in symptom misattribution for coronary heart disease symptoms and intentions to seek health care2019 · 11 citations
  2. 2Sex Differences in Inflammation during Atherosclerosis2014 · 172 citations
  3. 3Coronary Thermodilution to Assess Flow Reserve2002 · 349 citations
  4. 4Analysis of Probability as an Aid in the Clinical Diagnosis of Coronary-Artery Disease1979 · 2,689 citations
  5. 5Frequency of provoked coronary arterial spasm in 1089 consecutive patients undergoing coronary arteriography.1982 · 502 citations