Scholarlink

Background <p>The clinical relevance of myocardial bridge (MB) remains uncertain and inconsistently reported across studies. This study aimed to assess the relationship between MB and long-term mortality and morbidity, while accounting for the influence of varying patient populations and diagnostic methods used to detect MB.</p> Methods <p>A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify studies published up to December 2024 that examined the association between MB and adverse outcomes, including all-cause death (ACD), cardiovascular death (CVD), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE).</p> Results <p>A total of 22 studies involving 37,940 participants were included in the analysis. MB was not significantly associated with an increased risk of ACD or CVD. However, MB showed a significant association with MACE, with a pooled hazard ratio (HR) of 1.958 (95% CI: 1.490–2.572; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001) across 19 studies. Subgroup analysis indicated that MB identified through conventional coronary angiography was significantly linked to a higher risk of MACE (pooled HR: 1.992; 95% CI: 1.432–2.772; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001), whereas MB detected using multi-detector computed tomography did not show a statistically significant association with MACE. Among high-risk groups, such as patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and those with high-risk coronary artery disease, MB was associated with a notably increased risk of MACE, with pooled HRs of 2.174 (95% CI: 1.067–4.426; <i>P</i> = 0.032) and 3.435 (95% CI: 1.732–6.810; <i>P</i> &lt; 0.001), respectively.</p> Conclusions <p>MB was associated with an increased relative risk of MACE in pooled analyses but showed no significant association with isolated ACD or CVD.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Prognostic impact of myocardial bridge on long-term mortality and morbidity: A meta-analysis and systematic review

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月4日

查看全文
  • Yasir Salah Alam,
  • Hussein Nafakhi,
  • Liwaa Mahdi,
  • Alaa Salah Jumaah,
  • Mohammed Saeed Abdulzahra,
  • Hassan Abdulla Al-Aquli,
  • Akeel Abed Yasseen

摘要

Background

The clinical relevance of myocardial bridge (MB) remains uncertain and inconsistently reported across studies. This study aimed to assess the relationship between MB and long-term mortality and morbidity, while accounting for the influence of varying patient populations and diagnostic methods used to detect MB.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify studies published up to December 2024 that examined the association between MB and adverse outcomes, including all-cause death (ACD), cardiovascular death (CVD), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE).

Results

A total of 22 studies involving 37,940 participants were included in the analysis. MB was not significantly associated with an increased risk of ACD or CVD. However, MB showed a significant association with MACE, with a pooled hazard ratio (HR) of 1.958 (95% CI: 1.490–2.572; P < 0.001) across 19 studies. Subgroup analysis indicated that MB identified through conventional coronary angiography was significantly linked to a higher risk of MACE (pooled HR: 1.992; 95% CI: 1.432–2.772; P < 0.001), whereas MB detected using multi-detector computed tomography did not show a statistically significant association with MACE. Among high-risk groups, such as patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy and those with high-risk coronary artery disease, MB was associated with a notably increased risk of MACE, with pooled HRs of 2.174 (95% CI: 1.067–4.426; P = 0.032) and 3.435 (95% CI: 1.732–6.810; P < 0.001), respectively.

Conclusions

MB was associated with an increased relative risk of MACE in pooled analyses but showed no significant association with isolated ACD or CVD.