ReviewFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2026
Spontaneous coronary artery dissection as a threshold disorder of coronary wall integrity.
Review in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is an increasingly recognized cause of non-atherosclerotic acute myocardial infarction, predominantly affecting young and middle-aged women and patients during pregnancy or the postpartum period. Although major progress has been made in clinical recognition, angiographic diagnosis, conservative management, and extracoronary vascular screening, the molecular basis of SCAD remains incompletely understood. Here, we develop a provisional, evidence-integrating framework that conceptualizes SCAD as a threshold disorder of coronary wall integrity rather than as a variant of plaque rupture or a purely intimal tear-driven event. The available evidence indicates that the final common pathological event is intramural hematoma formation and true-lumen compression, whereas the threshold for this event is shaped by inherited susceptibility, extracellular matrix architecture, vascular smooth muscle cell and fibroblast regulation, vascular tone, local hemostatic containment, systemic arteriopathy, and reproductive or stress-related hemodynamic load. We critically evaluate inside-out and outside-in models of SCAD initiation, common and rare genetic architecture, the ambiguous role of fibromuscular dysplasia, pregnancy-associated SCAD, antithrombotic controversies, and emerging strategies for mechanism-informed risk stratification. We also define what is established, what remains controversial, and what should not yet be translated into routine practice. Finally, we propose a research roadmap centered on multiomic prospective cohorts, coronary wall models, high-resolution imaging phenotypes, reproductive vascular biology, and pragmatic clinical trials. The resulting taxonomy is intended to organize current evidence, identify priorities for mechanistic validation, and potentially support precision diagnosis, individualized antithrombotic decisions, reproductive counseling, genetic testing, and prevention of recurrence.
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.