ReviewCureus2026
Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction and Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Ischemia and Non-obstructive Coronary Arteries: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) is a major pathophysiological substrate of ischemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA), but available prognostic evidence remains heterogeneous in diagnostic methods, CMD definitions, outcome definitions, and reported effect measures. We conducted a systematic review with narrative synthesis of cohort studies examining the association between objectively verified CMD and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in adults with INOCA. MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception to June 2026. Eight cohort studies representing eight unique countries met eligibility criteria and were included in the narrative synthesis. Two independent cohorts reported adjusted dichotomous hazard ratios for a CMD-versus-no-CMD contrast: HR 2.97, 95% CI 1.39-6.34 and HR 3.12, 95% CI 1.22-7.97, respectively. The largest and highest-quality included study (N=1,681, NOS 9/9) reported an adjusted hazard ratio for continuous coronary flow velocity reserve and was summarized narratively. The remaining studies reported non-comparable effect measures, exposure scales, adjustment levels, or overlapping cohorts. Because of heterogeneity in CMD definitions, diagnostic modalities, exposure scales, and effect-measure types, no meta-analysis was performed. Available observational evidence suggests that objectively identified CMD may be associated with increased MACE risk in patients with INOCA. Larger prospective studies using standardized CMD definitions, harmonized MACE outcomes, adequate follow-up, and consistently adjusted time-to-event analyses are needed.
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.