MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3164285626 · doi:10.1097/hco.0000000000000886

Myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary artery disease (MINOCA): a review of pathophysiology and management

2021· review· en· W3164285626 on OpenAlexaff
Asim N. Cheema, Bobby Yanagawa, Subodh Verma, Akshay Bagai, Shuangbo Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Opinion in Cardiology · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Issues in Pregnancy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaSt. Michael's HospitalSouthlake Regional Health Center
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPathophysiologyMedicineCardiologyMyocardial infarctionCoronary artery diseaseInternal medicineInfarctionDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary artery disease (MINOCA) (≥ 50% stenosis) accounts for 5-8% of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) presentations. The demographic characteristics, risk factors, and management of patients with MINOCA differ from those with atherosclerotic ACS. The objective of this review is to provide a contemporary understanding of the epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical presentation, and management of MINOCA. RECENT FINDINGS: MINOCA is increasingly being recognized as an important and distinct cause of myocardial infarction among patients presenting with ACS. The predominant pathophysiologic mechanisms of MINOCA include both coronary (epicardial vasospasm, coronary microvascular disorder, spontaneous coronary artery dissection, coronary thrombus/embolism) and noncoronary (Takotsubo cardiomyopathy, myocarditis) pathologies. Coronary imaging with intravascular ultrasound and optical coherent tomography, coronary physiology testing, and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging offers important investigative modalities to facilitate diagnosis for appropriate management of MINOCA patients. SUMMARY: MINOCA is an important cause of ACS observed in certain patients with unique challenges for diagnosis and management. A high index of suspicion and a comprehensive diagnostic evaluation are critical for early recognition and successful management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Opinion in CardiologySame topicCardiovascular Issues in PregnancyFrench-language works237,207