ArticleCJC open2024
Unveiling the Longitudinal Journey: 3-Year Follow-up of Women with MINOCA and INOCA in a Specialized Heart Centre.
Article in CJC open, 2024. 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.
- Early diastolic dysfunction in patients with ischemia and no obstructive coronary artery disease: a prospective study on hybrid positron emission tomography-magnetic resonance imaging.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Symptom experience of women with ischemia and no obstructive coronary artery disease: A mixed-methods approach.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026Article
- Societal, occupational, and economic considerations for women with (M)INOCA: a narrative review.International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Myocardial infarction with no obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA), and ischemia with no obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA), are female-predominant conditions; clinical trials are lacking to guide medical management for the common underlying vasomotor etiologies. Data on long-term outcomes of (M)INOCA patients following attendance at a women's heart centre (WHC) are lacking. Methods: Women diagnosed with MINOCA (n = 51) or INOCA (n = 112) were prospectively followed for 3 years at the Leslie Diamond WHC (LDWHC) in Vancouver. Baseline characteristics, diagnoses, chest-pain type, major adverse cardiac events, hospital encounters, medications, and Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) responses were compared between the baseline and 3-year timepoints. The χ Results: MINOCA patients had significantly more nonexertional chest pain and more diagnoses of vasospasm than did INOCA patients, who had more exertional chest pain and more diagnoses of coronary microvascular dysfunction. Following the baseline timepoint, both groups had significant reductions in cardiovascular emergency room visits, with INOCA patients also experiencing fewer cardiovascular hospitalizations. At 3 years, the most commonly prescribed medications were calcium-channel blockers, long-acting nitrates, and beta-blockers, with MINOCA patients having more acetylsalicylic acid use, and INOCA patients having more short-acting nitrate and ranolazine prescriptions. Both groups observed significant improvements in SAQ scores, with greater improvements observed in INOCA patients. Patients with depression or who were prescribed ranolazine at 3 years had worse SAQ scores at baseline. Conclusions: The 3-year outcomes of (M)INOCA patients indicate that the LDWHC's comprehensive care model effectively improves diagnostic clarity, reduces the number of hospital encounters, optimizes medication management, and improves self-reported patient well-being.
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.