ReviewJournal of cardiovascular development and disease2026
Clinical Decision-Making and Imaging-Guided Follow-Up Strategies in Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection.
Review in Journal of cardiovascular development and disease, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is an important non-atherosclerotic cause of acute coronary syndrome, predominantly affecting younger women without traditional cardiovascular risk factors. In hemodynamically stable patients, accumulating evidence supports a conservative management strategy owing to the high rate of spontaneous vessel healing, while technically challenging invasive interventions should be reserved for selected high-risk cases. Despite growing evidence regarding acute management, recurrent SCAD and other adverse cardiovascular events have been reported during follow-up, underscoring the need for surveillance. However, optimal strategies for post-acute follow-up and for assessing the appropriateness of treatment decisions remain insufficiently established. This review focuses on clinical decision-making in the management of SCAD, with particular emphasis on follow-up assessment. We summarize the existing evidence regarding indications for conservative versus invasive treatment and discuss the clinical rationale for longitudinal imaging surveillance. Special attention is given to the role of non-invasive follow-up using coronary computed tomography angiography, including confirmation of vessel healing, evaluation of residual intramural hematoma, and assessment of distal coronary flow. Given the heterogeneity of SCAD and the risk of recurrence, individualized treatment decisions and structured follow-up strategies are essential to optimize management, avoid unnecessary invasive procedures, and support care and risk stratification in patients with SCAD.
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.