ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
Myocardial Bridging in Sports and Exercise Cardiology: Screening Challenges, Clinical Management, and Physical Activity Guidance.
Review in Journal of clinical 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
Myocardial bridging (MB) is a congenital coronary anomaly in which a segment of an epicardial coronary artery courses intramurally beneath the myocardium for part of its length, resulting in dynamic compression during systole. Once considered a largely benign incidental finding, accumulating evidence has demonstrated MB to be a clinically significant substrate for myocardial ischemia, arrhythmia, and sudden cardiac death (SCD), particularly under conditions of elevated adrenergic drive such as vigorous physical exercise. The prevalence of MB is highly dependent on the diagnostic modality used, ranging from approximately 0.5-2.5% on coronary angiography to 15-85% on post-mortem and advanced intravascular imaging studies, reflecting a substantial detection gap- in particular on routine cardiac screening tests. This review critically examines the current evidence base regarding MB in the context of competitive and recreational sport. We address: (1) the pathophysiology of exercise-induced hemodynamic compromise in MB; (2) the limitations of existing screening modalities-including electrocardiography, echocardiography, exercise stress testing, and advanced coronary imaging in identifying athletes at risk; (3) the clinical management of symptomatic MB, encompassing pharmacological therapy, coronary revascularization strategies, and catheter-based interventions; and (4) physical activity guidance for athletes with known or suspected MB.
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.