Multivessel spontaneous coronary artery dissection: clinical features, angiographic findings, management, and outcomes
Authors: Salamanca Viloria J , Garcia-Guimaraes M , Sabate M , Sanz-Ruiz R , Macaya F , Roura G , Jimenez-Kockar M , Nogales J M , Tizon H , Velazquez M , Veiga G , Bastante T , Alvarado T , Diez-Villanueva P , Alfonso F 
Published: October 2022

Background

Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is a rare cause of acute coronary syndrome. The rate of SCAD patients with multivessel (MV) involvement varies between series (6–13%)1,2. MV SCAD might be potentially associated to a worse prognosis due to a higher ischemic burden compared with patients with single-vessel (SV) involvement. However, comparative data between patients with MV versus SV SCAD is lacking.

Methods

The Spanish multicentre nationwide SCAD registry prospectively included 389 consecutive patients from 34 university hospitals. Patients were classified according to the number of affected vessels in two groups: SV or MV SCAD. In-hospital major adverse event (MAE) was defined as a composite of death, myocardial reinfarction, unplanned revascularization, cardiogenic shock, ventricular arrhythmia or stroke. A major cardiac or cerebrovascular adverse event (MACCE) was defined as a composite of death, myocardial reinfarction, unplanned revascularization, SCAD recurrence or stroke.

Results

A total of 41 patients (10.5%) presented MV SCAD (Table 1). There were no significant differences between groups regarding age, sex and distribution of most cardiovascular risk factors, with a non-significant trend towards more hypertension in the MV group (49% vs 34%, p=0.06). MV SCAD patients had more often previous history of hypothyroidism (22% vs 11%, p=0.04) and anxiety disorder (32% vs 16%, p=0.01), with a trend towards more fibromuscular dysplasia (50% vs 29%, p=0.12) among those patients screened. MV SCAD patients presented more often with NSTEMI (73% vs 52%, p=0.01). Regarding angiographic findings, MV SCAD patients presented more frequently focal type 3 lesions (19% vs 6%, p&lt;0.01) and fewer type 1 double-lumen lesions (12% vs 21%, p=0.04). The rate of lesions with an impaired initial Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow 0–1 was lower (14% vs 29%, p&lt;0.01) in MV SCAD. In both groups, most patients were treated conservatively (71% vs 79%, p=NS). We found no significant differences between groups in MAE during admission. At long-term follow-up (median 29 months), there were no significant differences in MACCE between groups (18% vs 12%, p=0.28). However, the rate of stroke was higher in patients with MV SCAD, both in-hospital (2.4% vs 0%, p&lt;0.01) and at follow-up (5.1% vs 0.6%, p=0.01). This finding could be explained by the basal differences found in hypertension and fibromuscular dysplasia between MV and SV SCAD patients.

Conclusions

Patients with MV SCAD have some distinctive clinical and angiographic features. We found no significant differences in our primary composite outcomes, both in-hospital and at long-term follow-up, between patients with SV and MV SCAD. Rate of stroke was significantly higher in patients with MV SCAD.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: None.