Observational studyMedicine2018
The multi-vessel and diffuse coronary spasm is a risk factor for persistent angina in patients received anti-angina medication.
Observational study in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical Characteristics and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Diabetic and Non-Diabetic Patients with Vasospastic Angina.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2024Article
- Coronary artery spasm treated with intracoronary bioresorbable scaffold implantation under the guidance of treadmill test and optical coherence tomography: A case report.Annals of noninvasive electrocardiology : the official journal of the International Society for Holter and Noninvasive Electrocardiology, Inc · 2023Article
- Assessment of coronary spasms with transluminal attenuation gradient in coronary computed tomography angiography.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronary artery spasm (CAS) is known to be a risk factor for cardiovascular events. However, there is limited data whether the multi-vessel and diffuse spasm (MVDS) is related to more adverse clinical outcomes compared to the Non-MVDS. The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of the MVDS on clinical outcomes during a 3-year clinical follow-up period.A total 2797 patients underwent coronary angiography (CAG) with acetylcholine (ACH) provocation test from Nov 2004 to Oct 2010 were enrolled. It is a single-center, observational, prospective, all-comers registry designed to reflect the "real world" practic. The patients were divided into the 3 groups; the negative spasm (NS) group (n = 1188), the Non-MVDS group (n = 1081), and the MVDS group (n = 528). The incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and recurrent angina was evaluated up to 3 years. To minimize confounding factors, multivariable Cox-proportional hazards regression analysis was performed.In the 3-year clinical follow-up, the incidence of total death, myocardial infarction, de novo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), cerebrovascular accident and MACE were similar among the 3 groups. However, recurrent angina occurred more frequently in the MVDS group than in the NS group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-3.02; P = .002). Recurrence angina between the MVDS group and the Non-MVDS group was not statistically significant (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 0.91-2.03; P = .129).In this study, although the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events were not different regardless of spasm type, the MVDS was associated with higher incidence of recurrent chest pain requiring repeat CAG during the 3-year follow-up period, suggesting more intensive optimal medical therapy with close clinical follow up would be necessary for this particular subset of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.