Evidence Hub

Prevalence of Myocardial Infarction With Obstructive and Non-Obstructive Coronary Arteries in a Middle-Aged Population With Chronic Airflow Limitation: A Cross-Sectional Study

J. Sundh, M. Ekström, A. Blomberg, Eva Lindberg, Andrei Malinovschi, A. Olin, C. Sköld, K. Torén et al.

International Journal of COPD, 2025

20,882 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

Purpose Myocardial infarctions (MIs) can occur in underlying obstructive coronary artery disease (MI-CAD) or in non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA). The primary objectives of the study were to investigate the prevalence of MI-CAD and MINOCA in people with CAL, and to explore if CAL is an independent risk factor for MI-CAD and MINOCA. Secondary objectives were to explore these research questions stratified by sex and by smoking history. Patients and Methods Cross-sectional analysis of the population-based Swedish CArdioPulmonary bioImage Study (SCAPIS) of people aged 50–64 years. CAL was defined as a post-bronchodilator ratio of forced expiratory volume in one second and forced vital capacity below 0.70. MI-CAD was defined as a self-reported MI with coronary computed tomography angiography findings of previous revascularization or at least one significant coronary stenosis (>50%), and MINOCA as self-reported MI with no previous revascularization and no significant coronary stenosis. Results In total, 1735 (8.3%) of 20,882 included participants had CAL. MI-CAD was more common than MINOCA both in people with (2.8 vs 0.6%) and without CAL (1.2 vs 0.3%). Compared with those without CAL, people with CAL had an almost doubled independent risk of both MI-CAD ([adjusted OR] 1.72; [95% CI] 1.22–2.42) and MINOCA (1.99; 1.02–3.86). In men, CAL was associated with increased risk of MINOCA (2.63; 1.23–5.64), and in women with increased risk for MI-CAD (3.43; 1.68–1.26). Conclusion…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cross-sectional, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 20,882 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free