ReviewNature reviews. Cardiology2024
Sex-specific and ethnicity-specific differences in MINOCA.
Review in Nature reviews. Cardiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Randomized Controlled Trial of Internet-Delivered Cognitive Behavioral Therapy After Myocardial Infarction With Nonobstructive Coronary Arteries or Takotsubo Syndrome.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2026Trial
- Molecular mechanisms of coronary microembolization-induced MINOCA.Basic research in cardiology · 2026Review
- Diagnostic Performance of a Novel AI-Guided Coronary Computed Tomography Algorithm for Predicting Myocardial Ischemia (AI-QCTJournal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions · 2026Article
- Hypercortisolism with coronary nonobstructive myocardial infarction and left ventricular noncompaction: a case report.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- The long-term prognostic value of the framingham risk scoring in patients with myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary arteries.American journal of preventive cardiology · 2025Article
- Molecular screening in a translational large animal trial identifies a differential inflammatory response for MINOCA.Basic research in cardiology · 2025Article
- Sex differences based on the timing of invasive management among patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: an individual patient data meta-analysis.European heart journal open · 2025Article
- Myocardial Infarction with Nonobstructive Coronary Arteries (MINOCA): Current Insights into Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and Management.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Coronary Inflammation and Cardiovascular Events in Patients Without Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease.Current cardiology reports · 2025Review
- Call to action for acute myocardial infarction in women: international multi-disciplinary practical roadmap.European heart journal open · 2024Review
- Sex differences in coronary atherogenesis: a narrative review.Ewha medical journal · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Suspected myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) has received increasing attention over the past decade. Given the heterogeneity in the mechanisms underlying acute myocardial infarction in the absence of obstructive coronary arteries, the syndrome of MINOCA is considered a working diagnosis that requires further investigation after diagnostic angiography studies have been performed, including coronary magnetic resonance angiography and functional angiography. Although once considered an infrequent and low-risk form of myocardial infarction, recent data have shown that the prognosis of MINOCA is not as benign as previously assumed. However, despite increasing awareness of the condition, many questions remain regarding the diagnosis, risk stratification and treatment of MINOCA. Women seem to be more susceptible to MINOCA, but studies on the sex-specific differences of the disease are scarce. Similarly, ethnicity-specific factors might explain discrepancies in the observed prevalence or underlying pathophysiological mechanisms of MINOCA but data are also scarce. Therefore, in this Review, we provide an update on the latest evidence available on the sex-specific and ethnicity-specific differences in the clinical features, pathophysiological mechanisms, treatment and prognosis of MINOCA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37775559What 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.