Dataset Information

Nonobstructive Versus Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Differences in prognosis and baseline clinical presentation have been documented among patient with acute coronary syndrome and coronary artery disease with obstructive (ObCAD) or nonobstructive arteries (NObCAD), but the rates of events largely varied across single studies. We carried out a meta-analysis to compare the clinical presentation and prognosis of NObCAD versus ObCAD acute coronary syndrome patients, as well as of the subjects with zero versus mild occlusion.

Methods and results

Searches were made in MedLine, EMBASE, Cochrane databases, and proceedings of international meetings up to June 30, 2015. We compared the risk of events of NObCAD versus ObCAD patients using random-effect meta-analyses. We also performed meta-analyses to estimate the yearly or monthly outcome rates in each single group. In NObCAD and ObCAD patients, respectively, the combined yearly rates were as follows: 2.4% versus 10.1% (all-cause mortality); 1.2% versus 6.0% (myocardial infarction), 4.0% versus 12.8% (all-cause mortality plus myocardial infarction), 1.4% versus 5.9% (cardiac death), and 9.2% versus 16.8% (major cardiovascular events). In the studies directly comparing NObCAD versus ObCAD, all of the above outcomes were significantly less frequent in NObCAD subjects (with risk ratios ranging from 0.33 to 0.66). No differences in any outcome rate were observed between mild occlusion (1-49% stenosis) and zero occlusion patients.

Conclusions

NObCAD in patients with acute coronary syndrome has a significantly lower cardiovascular risk at baseline and a subsequent lower likelihood of death or main cardiovascular events. However, these subjects are still at high risk for cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, suggesting potential undertreatment and calling for specific management.

SUBMITTER: Pizzi C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5210396 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Nonobstructive Versus Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis.

Pizzi Carmine C Xhyheri Borejda B Costa Grazia Maria GM Faustino Massimiliano M Flacco Maria Elena ME Gualano Maria Rosaria MR Fragassi Giorgia G Grigioni Francesco F Manzoli Lamberto L

Journal of the American Heart Association 20161216 12

<h4>Background</h4>Differences in prognosis and baseline clinical presentation have been documented among patient with acute coronary syndrome and coronary artery disease with obstructive (ObCAD) or nonobstructive arteries (NObCAD), but the rates of events largely varied across single studies. We carried out a meta-analysis to compare the clinical presentation and prognosis of NObCAD versus ObCAD acute coronary syndrome patients, as well as of the subjects with zero versus mild occlusion.<h4>Met ...[more]

PMID: 27986756

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe concept of hybrid coronary revascularization (HCR) combines the left internal mammary artery (LIMA)-left anterior descending (LAD) graft and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to non-LAD vessels. Multiple comparative studies have evaluated the safety and feasibility of HCR and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for multivessel coronary artery disease (MCAD). However, the sample size of each study was small, and evidences based on single-institutional experience. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to compare the short-term outcomes of HCR with those of CABG for MCAD.MethodPubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases, as well as conference proceedings, were searched for eligible studies published up to March 2014. We calculated summary odds ratios (OR) for primary endpoints (death, stroke; myocardial infarction (MI); target vessel revascularization (TVR); major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCEs)) and secondary endpoints (atrial fibrillation (AF); renal failure; length of stay in the intensive care unit (LoS in ICU); length of stay in hospital (LoS in hospital); red blood cell (RBC) transfusion). Data from 6176 participants were derived from ten cohort studies.ResultsHCR was non-inferior to CABG in terms of MACCEs during hospitalization (odds ratio (OR), 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.34-1.33)and at one-year follow-up(0.32, 0.05-1.89) , and no significant difference was found between HCR and CABG groups in in-hospital and one-year follow-up outcomes of death, MI, stroke, the prevalence of AF and renal failure, whereas HCR was associated with a lower requirement of RBC transfusion and shorter LoS in ICU and LoS in hospital than CABG (weighted mean difference (WMD) -1.25, 95% CI, -1.62 to -0.88; -17.47, -31.01 to -3.93; -1.77, -3.07 to -0.46; respectively).ConclusionOur meta-analysis indicates that HCR is feasible, safe and effective for the treatment of MCAD, with similar in-hospital and one-year follow-up outcome, significantly lower requirement of RBC transfusion, and faster recovery compared with CABG.

Project description:Little is known about cardiac adverse events among patients with nonobstructive coronary artery disease (CAD).To compare myocardial infarction (MI) and mortality rates between patients with nonobstructive CAD, obstructive CAD, and no apparent CAD in a national cohort.Retrospective cohort study of all US veterans undergoing elective coronary angiography for CAD between October 2007 and September 2012 in the Veterans Affairs health care system. Patients with prior CAD events were excluded.Angiographic CAD extent, defined by degree (no apparent CAD: no stenosis >20%; nonobstructive CAD: ?1 stenosis ?20% but no stenosis ?70%; obstructive CAD: any stenosis ?70% or left main [LM] stenosis ?50%) and distribution (1, 2, or 3 vessel).The primary outcome was 1-year hospitalization for nonfatal MI after the index angiography. Secondary outcomes included 1-year all-cause mortality and combined 1-year MI and mortality.Among 37,674 patients, 8384 patients (22.3%) had nonobstructive CAD and 20,899 patients (55.4%) had obstructive CAD. Within 1 year, 845 patients died and 385 were rehospitalized for MI. Among patients with no apparent CAD, the 1-year MI rate was 0.11% (n?=?8, 95% CI, 0.10%-0.20%) and increased progressively by 1-vessel nonobstructive CAD, 0.24% (n?=?10, 95% CI, 0.10%-0.40%); 2-vessel nonobstructive CAD, 0.56% (n?=?13, 95% CI, 0.30%-1.00%); 3-vessel nonobstructive CAD, 0.59% (n?=?6, 95% CI, 0.30%-1.30%); 1-vessel obstructive CAD, 1.18% (n?=?101, 95% CI, 1.00%-1.40%); 2-vessel obstructive CAD, 2.18% (n?=?110, 95% CI, 1.80%-2.60%); and 3-vessel or LM obstructive CAD, 2.47% (n?=?137, 95% CI, 2.10%-2.90%). After adjustment, 1-year MI rates increased with increasing CAD extent. Relative to patients with no apparent CAD, patients with 1-vessel nonobstructive CAD had a hazard ratio (HR) for 1-year MI of 2.0 (95% CI, 0.8-5.1); 2-vessel nonobstructive HR, 4.6 (95% CI, 2.0-10.5); 3-vessel nonobstructive HR, 4.5 (95% CI, 1.6-12.5); 1-vessel obstructive HR, 9.0 (95% CI, 4.2-19.0); 2-vessel obstructive HR, 16.5 (95% CI, 8.1-33.7); and 3-vessel or LM obstructive HR, 19.5 (95% CI, 9.9-38.2). One-year mortality rates were associated with increasing CAD extent, ranging from 1.38% among patients without apparent CAD to 4.30% with 3-vessel or LM obstructive CAD. After risk adjustment, there was no significant association between 1- or 2-vessel nonobstructive CAD and mortality, but there were significant associations with mortality for 3-vessel nonobstructive CAD (HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.5), 1-vessel obstructive CAD (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.4-2.6), 2-vessel obstructive CAD (HR, 2.8; 95% CI, 2.1-3.7), and 3-vessel or LM obstructive CAD (HR, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.6-4.4). Similar associations were noted with the combined outcome.In this cohort of patients undergoing elective coronary angiography, nonobstructive CAD, compared with no apparent CAD, was associated with a significantly greater 1-year risk of MI and all-cause mortality. These findings suggest clinical importance of nonobstructive CAD and warrant further investigation of interventions to improve outcomes among these patients.

Dataset Information

Nonobstructive Versus Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis.

Background

Methods and results

Conclusions

Publications

Nonobstructive Versus Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets