Abstract 10285: Prognostic Value of Provocative Spasm Test in Patients With Myocardial Infarction With and Without Obstructive Coronary Arteries

Résumé fourni par la source

Introduction : Coronary spasm potentially contributes to the pathogenesis of acute myocardial infarction (MI) with obstructive coronary artery disease (MICAD) and particularly warrants close consideration in MI with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA). However, there are limited data concerning the impact of coronary spasm in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We aimed to assess the prognostic impact of provocative coronary spasm in both MICAD and MINOCA. Methods: Of 1,101 AMI patients admitted to our hospital from January 2012 to December 2019, 267 AMI patients (MICAD: n=198, MINOCA: n=69) who underwent emergency CAG and invasive provocative spasm test were assessed. The primary endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as cardiovascular death, acute coronary syndrome, or revascularization. The median follow-up duration was 48 months. Results: Provocative test was positive in 143 (72.2%) of MICAD group and 33 (47.8%) of MINOCA group. In MICAD group, spasm-positive patients had a significantly higher occurrence of both MACE [27 (18.9%) vs. 4 (7.3%); p=0.0413] and Revascularization [25 (17.5%) vs. 3 (5.5%); p=0.0296] compared to spasm-negative patients. In MINOCA group, MACE occurred only in patients with spasm-positive [4 (12.1%) vs. 0 (0%); p=0.0473]. Among the 4 groups based on the type of MI (MICAD or MINOCA) and the presence of provoked coronary spasm, there was a significant difference in the MACE-free survival rate, with the lowest rate observed for MICAD patients with spasm-positive (log rank P=0.0111). In a Multivariable analysis, provoked coronary spasm was significantly associated with MACE in MICAD group (hazard ratio, 3.37;95% CI, 1.20-12.10; P=0.0189). Conclusions: Provocative spasm test could provide prognostic stratification for AMI patients.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.