Abstract

The universal definition of acute myocardial infarction (MI) requires both evidence of myocardial injury and myocardial ischaemia. In MINOCA (MI with non-obstructive coronary arteries), patients must fulfil this MI criteria, but is their chest pain similar to those who have MI with obstructive CAD (MICAD)? This study compares prospectively collected chest pain features between patients with MINOCA and MICAD. Utilising the Coronary Angiogram Database of South Australia (CADOSA), consecutive MI patients were categorized as MINOCA or MICAD based on angiographic findings. Chest pain data were collected via direct patient interviews by trained staff members. Of 6811 consecutive patients fulfilling a clinical MI diagnosis, 411 (6.0%) were MINOCA, and 5948 MICAD. The MINOCA patients were younger, more often female and had less cardiovascular risk factors than those with MICAD. There were no significant differences in chest pain characteristics between the MINOCA and MICAD cohorts in relation to pain location, quality, associated symptoms, or duration. In conclusion, MINOCA patients have chest pain characteristics that are indistinguishable from MICAD patients, suggesting that their pain is ischaemic in nature. Thus, in the presence of positive myocardial injury markers, ischaemic chest pain fulfils the universal criteria for MI, despite the absence of obstructive coronary artery disease.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call