ArticleFrontiers in ophthalmology2026
Myocardial infarction following fluorescein angiography: a case report and review of the literature.
Article in Frontiers in ophthalmology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Fluorescein angiography (FA) is a commonly utilized procedure to evaluate retinal vasculature. Although relatively safe, the procedure carries a small risk of serious life-threatening adverse reactions. The purpose of this report is to describe a case of a non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) after fluorescein angiography. Case presentation: A 76-year-old woman with a history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and type 2 diabetes mellitus presented to the clinic with subacute-onset bilateral vision and hearing loss. Ophthalmic exam demonstrated neovascularization of the optic disc and iris in the left eye. A recent brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) suggested systemic vasculitis. FA was obtained to rule out Susac syndrome and evaluate for possible vasculitic etiology of her vision loss. Approximately 10 min after the procedure, she developed acute central chest pain and hypertension. She was sent to the emergency department (ED), and workup revealed a non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction for which she was admitted. Cardiac catheterization confirmed an occlusion of the right coronary artery. She was managed medically and subsequently discharged upon stabilization. Conclusion: This case reports the extremely rare and life-threatening complication of acute myocardial infarction following FA. Possible underlying mechanisms include an allergic-mediated coronary vasospasm (aka Kounis syndrome) or anxiety-related catecholamine release in pre-existing diseased myocardium. This event underscores the critical importance of thorough patient counseling, clinical vigilance, and institutional readiness to manage acute systemic emergencies associated with this common procedure.
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.