Background Myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary arteries ( MINOCA ) is a heterogeneous disease entity. Its prognosis and predictor of mortality remain unclear. This study aimed to compare the prognosis between MINOCA and myocardial infarction with obstructive coronary artery disease and identify factors related to all‐cause death in MINOCA using a nation‐wide, multicenter, and prospective registry. Methods and Results Among 13 104 consecutive patients enrolled, patients without previous history of significant coronary artery disease who underwent coronary angiography were selected. The primary outcome was 2‐year all‐cause death. Secondary outcomes were cardiac death, noncardiac death, reinfarction, and repeat revascularization. Patients with MINOCA (n=396) and myocardial infarction with obstructive coronary artery disease (n=10 871) showed similar incidence of all‐cause death (9.1% versus 8.8%; hazard ratio [ HR ], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.74–1.45; P =0.83). Risks of cardiac death, noncardiac death, and reinfarction were not significantly different between the 2 groups ( HR , 0.82; 95% CI , 0.53–1.28; P =0.38; HR , 1.55; 95% CI , 0.93–2.56; P =0.09; HR , 1.23; 95% CI , 0.65–2.31; P =0.38, respectively). MINOCA patients had lower incidence of repeat revascularization (1.3% versus 7.2%; HR , 0.17; 95% CI , 0.07–0.41; P <0.001). Results were consistent after multivariable regression and propensity‐score matching. In a multivariate model, several significant predictors of all‐cause death of MINOCA were found, including the nonuse of renin‐angiotensin system blockers ( HR , 2.63; 95% CI , 1.08–6.25; P =0.033) and statins ( HR , 2.17; 95% CI , 1.04–4.54; P =0.039). Conclusions Patients with MINOCA and those with myocardial infarction with obstructive coronary artery disease had comparable clinical outcomes. Use of renin‐angiotensin system blockers and statins was associated with lower mortality in patients with MINOCA .

No abstract

No abstract

Based on our data, the addition of CCTA-detected obstructive CAD to models that include traditional risk factors improves the predictions of MACE in asymptomatic patients with type 2 diabetes.

No abstract

No abstract

Anti-platelet agents are commonly used in vasospastic angina (VA) patients with comorbidity like coronary artery disease. However, long-term clinical outcomes in the use of aspirin, clopidogrel or the two agents together have rarely been investigated in VA patients. In a prospective study, we enrolled 2960 patients who received coronary angiography and ergonovine provocation test at 11 university hospitals in Korea. Among them, 1838 patients were diagnosed either with definite (n = 680) or intermediate (n = 1212) VA, using the criteria of chest pain, ECG changes and ergonovine provocation test results. They were analyzed according to their use of aspirin, clopidogrel or both, or no anti-platelet agent at all. The primary outcome was time to composite events of death from any cause, acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and symptomatic arrhythmia during a 3-year follow-up. A primary composite outcome was significantly more common in the aspirin plus clopidogrel group, at 10.8% (14/130), as compared with the non-antiplatelet group, at 4.4% (44/1011), (hazard ratio [HR] 2.41, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32–4.40, p = 0.004). With regard to the person-time event rate, similar results were shown, with the highest rate in the aspirin plus clopidogrel user at 4.72/1000 person months (95% CI, 2.79–7.96, log-rank test for primary outcome p = 0.016). The person-time event of the ACS rate was also highest in that group, at 2.81 (95% CI, 1.46–5.40, log-rank test for ACS p = 0.116). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated poor prognosis in primary outcomes and ACS in aspirin plus clopidogrel users (log-rank test, p = 0.005 and p = 0.0392, respectively). Cox-proportional hazard regression analysis, adjusting for age, sex, history of coronary heart disease, hypertension, diabetes, presence or not of definite spasm, use of calcium channel blocker, demonstrated that the use of aspirin plus clopidogrel is an independent risk for the primary outcome (HR 2.01, CI: 1.07–3.81, p = 0.031). The aspirin-alone group had a similar primary and individual event rate compared to the no-antiplatelet agent group (HR 0.96, CI, 0.59–1.55, p = 0.872). Smokers using aspirin plus clopidogrel had poorer outcomes than non-smokers, with HR 6.36 (CI 2.31–17.54, p = 0.045 for interaction). In conclusion, among VA patients, aspirin plus clopidogrel use is associated with a poor clinical outcome at 3 years, especially in ACS. Aspirin alone appears to be safe for use in those patients.

Posaconazole is a new oral triazole with broad-spectrum antifungal activity. Posaconazole has also shown a significant advantage of preventing invasive fungal infection compared to fluconazole or itraconazole in patients with prolonged neutropenia. Indeed, posaconazole has been commonly used for antifungal prophylaxis in patients undergoing remission induction chemotherapy for acute myelogenous leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. We experienced a case of fatal mucormycosis despite posaconazole prophylaxis. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of fatal breakthrough mucormycosis in a patient receiving posaconazole prophylaxis during remission induction chemotherapy in Korea. This case demonstrated that breakthrough fungal infection can occurs in patients receiving posaconazole prophylaxis because of its limited activity against some mucorales.