Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 11, 2025

Author Spotlight: Enhancing Coronary Artery Revascularization
Published on: September 15, 2023
Long-Term Outcomes Comparing Medical Therapy versus Revascularization for Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection
Chayakrit Krittanawong1, Salik Nazir2, Hafeez Hassan Virk3
1Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, Tex; Section of Cardiology, Baylor School of Medicine, Houston, Tex.
Insights
Management of spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) shows no significant difference in death, recurrence, or repeat revascularization between medical and invasive therapies. Stable patients without high-risk features may benefit from medical management for SCAD.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Vascular Medicine
- Interventional Cardiology
Background:
- Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) management strategies lack clear definition.
- Optimal treatment pathways for SCAD require further investigation.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the long-term outcomes of medical therapy versus invasive therapy for spontaneous coronary artery dissection.
- To evaluate the risks of death, SCAD recurrence, and repeat revascularization in SCAD patients based on treatment allocation.
Main Methods:
- A comprehensive meta-analysis of original studies, including randomized controlled trials and observational studies, was conducted.
- Searched databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science (1966-September 2020).
- Compared outcomes between patients receiving medical therapy and those undergoing invasive therapy (PCI or CABG).
Main Results:
- No statistically significant differences were observed in the risk of death (RR=0.753), SCAD recurrence (RR=1.09), or repeat revascularization (RR=0.64) between medical and invasive therapy groups.
- Follow-up periods ranged from 4 months to 3 years.
- Low heterogeneity was noted for SCAD recurrence (I²=0.0%).
Conclusions:
- In this meta-analysis of observational studies, medical therapy and invasive therapy for SCAD yielded similar long-term risks for death, recurrence, and repeat revascularization.
- Findings support current expert consensus favoring medical therapy for clinically stable SCAD patients without high-risk features.
- Further large-scale studies, including randomized controlled trials, are necessary to validate these outcomes.
Abstract:
The ideal management of spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) has yet to be clearly defined. We conducted a comprehensive search of Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science from database inception from 1966 through September 2020 for all original studies (randomized controlled trials and observational studies) that evaluated patients with SCAD. Study groups were defined by allocation to medical therapy (medical therapy) versus invasive therapy (invasive therapy) (ie, percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting). The risk of death (risk ratio [RR] = 0.753; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21-2.73; I2 = 21.1%; P = 0.61), recurrence of SCAD (RR = 1.09; 95% CI: 0.61-1.93; I2 = 0.0%; P = 0.74), and repeat revascularization (RR = 0.64; 95% CI: 0.21-1.94; I2 = 57.6%; P = 0.38) were not statistically different between medical therapy and invasive therapy for a follow-up ranging from 4 months to 3 years. In conclusion, in this meta-analysis of observational studies, the long-term risk of death, recurrent SCAD, and repeat revascularization did not significantly differ among patients with SCAD treated with medical therapy compared with those treated with invasive therapy. These findings support the current expert consensus that patients should be treated with medical therapy when clinically stable and no high-risk features are present. Further large-scale studies including randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care
Acute Coronary Syndrome IV: Interprofessional Care
Aneurysm III: Interprofessional Care

