Survival in Patients With Suspected Myocardial Infarction With Nonobstructive Coronary Arteries: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis From the MINOCA Global Collaboration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Suspected myocardial infarction (MI) with nonobstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) occurs in ≈5% to 10% of patients with MI referred for coronary angiography. The prognosis of these patients may differ to those with MI and obstructive coronary artery disease (MI-CAD) and those without a MI (patients without known history of MI [No-MI]). The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the 12-month all-cause mortality of patients with MINOCA. Methods: Using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, the terms “MI,” “nonobstructive,” “angiography,” and “prognosis” were searched in PubMed and Embase databases from inception to December 2018, including original, English language MINOCA studies with >100 consecutive patients. Publications with a heterogeneous cohort, unreported coronary stenosis, or exclusively focusing on MINOCA-mimicking conditions, were excluded. Unpublished data were obtained from the MINOCA Global Collaboration. Data were pooled and analyzed using Paule-Mandel, Hartung, Knapp, Sidik & Jonkman, or restricted maximum-likelihood random-effects meta-analysis methodology. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran’s Q and I 2 statistics. The primary outcome was 12-month all-cause mortality in patients with MINOCA, with secondary comparisons to MI-CAD and No-MI. Results: The 23 eligible studies yielded 55 369 suspected MINOCA, 485 382 MI-CAD, and 33 074 No-MI. Pooled meta-analysis of 14 MINOCA studies accounting for 30 733 patients revealed an unadjusted 12-month all-cause mortality rate of 3.4% (95% CI, 2.6%–4.2%) and reinfarction (n=27 605; 10 studies) in 2.6% (95% CI, 1.7%–3.5%). MINOCA had a lower 12-month all-cause mortality than those with MI-CAD (3.3% [95% CI, 2.5%–4.1%] versus 5.6% [95% CI, 4.1%–7.0%]; odds ratio, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.52–0.70], P <0.001). In contrast, there was a statistically nonsignificant trend towards increased 12-month all-cause mortality in patients with MINOCA (2.6% [95% CI, 0%–5.9%]) compared with No-MI (0.7% [95% CI, 0.1%–1.3%]; odds ratio, 3.71 [95% CI, 0.58–23.61], P =0.09). Conclusions: In the largest contemporary MINOCA meta-analysis to date, patients with suspected MINOCA had a favorable prognosis compared with MI-CAD, but statistically nonsignificant trend toward worse outcomes compared to those with No-MI. Registration: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ ; Unique identifier: CRD42020145356.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.017 | 0.037 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".