Diagnostic Angiograms and Percutaneous Coronary Interventions in Pregnancy

Login or register to view PDF.
Creative Commons Licence
 
Abstract

Cardiovascular disease is the leading indirect cause of maternal mortality in the UK. Pregnancy increases the risk of acute MI (AMI) by threeto fourfold secondary to the profound physiological changes that place an extra burden on the cardiovascular system. AMI is not always recognised in pregnancy and there is concern among both clinicians and patients regarding catheter-based interventions due to fears of foetal irradiation and risks to the foetus. This article evaluates the current state of knowledge on AMI in pregnancy with particular emphasis on pregnancy-associated spontaneous coronary artery dissection and percutaneous coronary intervention as the revascularisation procedure for AMI. Special considerations that must be made in patients requiring percutaneous coronary intervention for pregnancy-associated spontaneous coronary artery dissection and the current recommendations on arterial access, methods of minimising radiation and stent selection are discussed.

Disclosure
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Correspondence
Vijay Kunadian, Translation and Clinical Research Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, 4th Floor William Leech Building, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE2 4HH, UK. E: vijay.kunadian@newcastle.ac.uk
Received date
31 January 2020
Accepted date
02 April 2020
DOI
https://doi.org/10.15420/icr.2020.02
Open access
This work is open access under the CC-BY-NC 4.0 License which allows users to copy, redistribute and make derivative works for non-commercial purposes, provided the original work is cited correctly.

Many profound physiological changes take place in the cardiovascular system during pregnancy to meet the increased metabolic demands of both the mother and foetus. Such changes include an increase in circulating blood volume and cardiac output and decreases in systemic vascular resistance, blood pressure and hypercoagulation.1,2 The increase in circulatory burden during pregnancy and the postpartum period can unmask pre-existing undiagnosed cardiac disease, cause the deterioration of known heart disease or lead to the development of a new one.1

Cardiovascular disease in pregnancy is an increasingly important cause of maternal morbidity and mortality.3 The latest report from the Mothers and Babies: Reducing Risk through Audits and Confidential Enquiries across the UK (MBRRACE-UK) showed that cardiac disease is the leading indirect cause of maternal deaths up to 6 weeks after the postpartum period.4 This report is supported by the Confidential Enquiries into Maternal and Child Health (CEMACH) finding that in the UK, the overall rate of mortality secondary to cardiac disease has risen from 7.3 per million births in the 1982–1984 triennium to 22.7 per million births in the 2003–2005 triennium.5 Despite this increase, data from the MBRRACE-UK report showed that 90% of pregnant women who died between 2014 and 2016 did not have a pre-existing cardiac condition.4 It appears that the major part of this increase is attributable to acquired cardiac disease, with one-third of these deaths being secondary to acute MI (AMI) or ischaemic heart disease.4 Understandably, there is concern among cardiologists and obstetricians regarding the treatment of AMI in pregnancy, especially percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This article will focus on AMI in pregnancy and PCI in detail.

Acute MI in Pregnancy

AMI in pregnancy leads to poor maternal and foetal outcomes, and the mortality rate is twice as high in cases where AMI occurs during the peripartum period.6 The incidence of coronary artery disease (CAD) in women of child-bearing age is currently low and AMI is quite uncommon in this population (3–100 per 100,000 deliveries).7 Interestingly, a large UK-based study recently demonstrated that prior hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, such as gestational hypertension and eclampsia, were associated with increased arterial stiffness and a long-term risk of a range of cardiovascular diseases, including CAD.8 Thus, there is a possibility for the incidence of CAD in women of child-bearing age to increase in future with the increasing incidence of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy.8

Despite the low CAD rate, pregnancy increases the risk of AMI by three- to fourfold compared to non-pregnant women of similar age (Table 1).9 This risk is age-related, being 30 times higher for women >40 years of age compared with women aged <20 years.10

Over the past two decades, there has been an increase in the use of fertility therapy, such as in vitro fertilisation, particularly among older women.11 Fertility therapy often involves repeated cycles of high-dose hormonal stimulation protocols and superovulation itself is pro-thrombotic;12,13 therefore, it is plausible that in vitro fertilisation and other fertility therapy techniques contribute to cardiovascular risk.12 However, a recent systematic review and meta-analysis reported no increased risk of developing an acute cardiac event following fertility therapy.12 This finding is supported by a large population-based Canadian study involving 6,979 women, where the authors concluded that successful fertility therapy was not associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease in later life.11

Current Knowledge Regarding Acute MI

Open in new tab
Open ppt

Acute MI in Pregnancy

Open in new tab
Open ppt

Overall, the incidence of AMI is higher in multigravidas and during the third trimester.6 Pregnant women with AMI during the postpartum period tend to be younger than those experiencing AMI during the antepartum or peripartum periods.14 Aside from traditional cardiovascular risk factors, other risk factors specific to pregnancy include pre-eclampsia, the presence of prosthetic valves, anaemia and thrombophilia.15,16 Despite the increased risk of AMI in pregnancy, one US-based study found that of 859 patients presenting with AMI during pregnancy and the postpartum period, only 45% had undergone cardiac catheterisation.17 The authors highlighted that the diagnosis of AMI is not suspected as often as it should be and that there is a general reluctance of physicians to intervene.17

MI with Obstructive Coronary Arteries

ST-elevation in MI in Pregnancy

ST-elevation MI (STEMI) in pregnant women involves the anterior wall in 70–80% of cases.18 In more than half of cases, reduction of left ventricular ejection fraction to <40% was observed, leading to a high incidence of heart failure, cardiogenic shock and ventricular arrhythmias.18 Diagnostic criteria are the same as for patients who are not pregnant and are based on clinical symptoms, ECG changes and an increase in troponin levels.19,20 It should be noted that ST elevation is not seen in normal pregnancy and warrants urgent attention.19 STEMI in pregnant women should be managed in the same way as in non-pregnant women. Given the high mortality associated with STEMI in pregnancy, the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) recommends primary PCI as the preferred reperfusion therapy.13

Non-ST-elevated MI in Pregnancy

Similarly to STEMI, there are no differences in diagnostic criteria between pregnant and non-pregnant patients presenting with non-ST-elevation MI (NSTEMI). It is important to note that ST segment depression and T-wave inversion can be a normal variant seen in pregnancy.19

Both the American Heart Association and ESC guidelines recommend that myocardial revascularisation with PCI be reserved for pregnant women with NSTEMI who are unstable or present with serious complications unresponsive to medical therapy.13,21

MI with Non-obstructive Coronary Arteries

In pregnancy, causes of MI with non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) include spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD), coronary embolism and severe coronary artery vasospasm (Figure 1).22 While pregnancy-associated SCAD (P-SCAD) is more common, there are a few case reports of AMI secondary to coronary embolism and coronary artery vasospasm.22–25

P-SCAD

In the general population, the majority of AMI occurs as a result of coronary atherosclerosis, typically leading to STEMI or NSTEMI. In pregnancy, SCAD is the most common cause of AMI and tends to occur mainly in late pregnancy or during the early postpartum period.7,18,20 Although previously considered rare, it has recently become clear that SCAD is an important and underdiagnosed cause of AMI in women.26,27 P-SCAD makes up <10% of the total number of SCAD cases.26,27

In the past, SCAD was frequently reported as a disorder mostly affecting women with no risk factors for cardiovascular disease. However, a recent study has demonstrated that conventional cardiovascular risk factors, such as hypertension, dyslipidaemia and smoking, are not uncommon in patients presenting with SCAD.28

P-SCAD is most frequent during the first postpartum month, but cases have been reported during early pregnancy and up to 18 months postpartum.29,30 It has been suggested that this might be related to cardiac stress secondary to rapid post-delivery uterine contraction and the return of a copious volume of blood to the systemic circulation.31,32 Most patients tend to have a history of multiple pregnancies.29,32 Although the association is unclear, there is a potential link with arterial degeneration, which could be compounded by multiple pregnancies.33

Studies have shown that SCAD is not benign and can have complications such as life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death.30 P-SCAD patients can have a more severe clinical presentation, such as acute heart failure and multivessel dissections, than patients with non-pregnancy-associated SCAD.32 Additionally, it has significant reported recurrence of ~10% at 3-year follow-up and major adverse cardiovascular event rates.34,35

In a recent Canadian prospective cohort study of 236 SCAD patients, the rate of recurrent MI was 19.1%, recurrent SCAD was 12.7%, stroke or transient ischaemic attack was 1.3% and mortality was 1.7% at a median 2.3-year follow-up.36 Thus, women of child-bearing age with a history of SCAD should be carefully counselled regarding the risk of recurrent events.

Pathophysiology

It is rare for patients with SCAD to have recognised hereditary connective tissue disorders, such as Marfan syndrome and vascular Ehlers-Danlos syndrome.34,37 With SCAD, there is sudden disruption of the coronary artery wall, resulting in separation of the inner intimal lining from the outer vessel wall, leading to an intramural haematoma (Figure 2), or rupture of the vasa vasorum, leading to intramural haematoma.30 This can cause luminal compression and obstruction and, if the haematoma expands, can cause propagation of the dissection plane.30,38 Typically, patients with SCAD have fragile arterial walls with no atheroma or calcification to limit the propagation of dissection, which means the dissections tend to be more extensive.30

There have been several proposals in the literature regarding the pathophysiology of P-SCAD. Although the exact mechanism is undetermined, the proposals focus on hormonal and haemodynamic changes as possible causes. These changes include excess progesterone leading to structural weakening of the vessel wall and consecutive shearing stress secondary to increased cardiac output and circulatory volume.18,29,39

Clinical Presentation and Diagnosis

The clinical presentation of P-SCAD is dependent on the extent and rate of dissection as well as the degree of myocardial ischaemia.40 Patients can present with STEMI, but may also have more serious presentations, such as cardiogenic shock or pericardial tamponade.29 Tamponade could result from direct extension of the dissection into the pericardial space, rupture of infarcted myocardium or from post-infarction pericarditis.41 Clinical symptoms of P-SCAD include chest pain, dyspnoea, diaphoresis, nausea, vomiting and a ‘popping’ or ‘clicking’ sensation in the chest.29,32 Most patients have elevated troponin levels, although it has been observed that there is a wide variation in the rise in troponin I.42

Pathological Mechanisms Underlying Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection

Open in new tab
Open ppt

Coronary angiography is the first-line diagnostic imaging method in SCAD due to its wide availability.43,44 It is of vital importance that extra care is taken, as there is a risk of iatrogenic extension of the dissection.45 When there is diagnostic uncertainty, intracoronary imaging using optical coherence tomography and intravascular ultrasound can allow detailed visualisation of the arterial wall.43,44

Another study has shown that in P-SCAD there are more frequent findings of left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%, and patients are more likely to experience SCAD affecting the left main or multiple vessels.32 There are multiple reports that the left anterior descending artery is the most frequently affected vessel.17,29,46 The haemodynamic and anatomical differences between the right and left coronary arteries could explain this finding. For instance, the left anterior descending artery is subjected to increased torsion force during the cardiac cycle due to a higher number of branches than the right coronary artery.7,47

Management

Optimal management of P-SCAD is controversial. Generally, the ‘conservative if possible’ approach is preferred; both recent European and US consensus statements emphasise a preference for a conservative approach.43,44 In the majority of cases, arteries affected by SCAD heal spontaneously and studies have suggested that revascularisation is associated with a high failure rate.38,48,49 Additionally, PCI for SCAD has an increased risk of extending the dissection and requiring emergency surgery.29,38 However, the lack of randomised controlled trials means there is no specific recommendation; the decision ultimately depends on the clinical presentation, extent of coronary artery dissection and size of myocardium at risk. Nevertheless, in patients with ongoing or recurrent ischaemia, haemodynamic instability or isolated left main dissection, it has been suggested that PCI should be performed if the anatomy is suitable.50

Coronary Embolism

Hypercoagulable states, such as pregnancy, increase the risk of embolic disease.51 Thus, despite its rarity, coronary embolism is an important condition to be aware of as a cause of MINOCA during pregnancy. ST segment elevation can be seen on ECG in the majority of patients presenting with coronary embolism.52 The diagnosis is challenging, but clinical suspicion should be increased in patients with predisposing conditions, such as AF, right-to-left cardiac shunt, prosthetic heart valves and antiphospholipid syndrome as well as a low likelihood of CAD.53 Typically, coronary embolism affects the left coronary system as the left main artery is larger than the right coronary artery and receives a greater proportion of blood flow, making it more likely to receive emboli.54

There are three types of coronary embolism: direct, paradoxical and iatrogenic.55 Direct coronary emboli typically arise from the left atrial appendage, left ventricle or aortic and mitral valves.55 Pregnant women with mechanical prosthetic valves are particularly vulnerable as the valves themselves are thrombogenic and it is difficult to achieve adequate anticoagulation.25 This is evident in the case reports of AMI in pregnancy secondary to thromboembolism originating from prosthetic valves.23,25 Paradoxical emboli originate from the venous system and usually pass through a patent foramen ovale, an atrial septal defect or pulmonary arteriovenous malformations.

Pregnancy is associated with a fourfold increased risk of venous thromboembolism, but the incidence of paradoxical coronary embolism is unknown.24,55 One case has reported on coronary embolism in pregnancy secondary to a paradoxical embolus, but the patient was a factor V Leiden carrier.24 With the increased use of coronary angiograms, valvuloplasty and other invasive coronary interventions, iatrogenic coronary embolism is currently the most common cause of embolism in the coronary arteries.52,54 Possible mechanisms for this may be the formation of clots in catheters, accidental introduction of air during invasive procedures and, on rare occasions, embolisation of friable calcific valvular material from the aortic valve into the coronary arteries during such procedures.52,55

At present, there is no consensus regarding the optimal management of AMI secondary to coronary embolism due to its rarity. Various attempts to treat the condition have been described in numerous case reports using intracoronary thrombolysis, aspiration catheter and ballooning and/or stenting, with varying success.25 Large population-based studies in this area are required to obtain further knowledge (Table 1).

Coronary Artery Vasospasm

AMI secondary to coronary artery vasospasm in pregnancy is very rare.22 One case has been reported in the literature where a woman in her 38th week of pregnancy presented with sudden severe substernal central chest pain and ST-elevation.22

According to the ESC consensus document on vasospastic angina, coronary artery spasm is defined as transient total or subtotal coronary artery occlusion (>90% constriction) with angina and ischaemic ECG changes either spontaneously or in response to a provocative stimulus, such as acetylcholine and hyperventilation.56 Diagnosis of coronary artery spasm itself is challenging and often requires provocative testing with intracoronary acetylcholine during invasive coronary angiography, where >90% vasoconstriction is the angiographic threshold to diagnose inducible spasm.56 Smoking is a risk factor and East Asians could potentially be predisposed to coronary vasospasm.56,57 In cases of recent STEMI requiring reperfusion therapy, it has been reported that Japanese patients had hyper-reactive vessels compared to white patients.57

One of the proposed mechanisms for coronary vasospasm is endothelial dysfunction, as it promotes coronary vasoconstriction.15 In pregnancy, pre-eclampsia is a strong risk factor as it causes systemic endothelial dysfunction due to imbalance in the secretion of endothelin and thromboxane.16 Other suggested causes of coronary vasospasm in pregnancy include enhanced vascular reactivity to angiotensin II and noradrenaline, renin release and angiotensin production due to decreased uterine perfusion in the supine position, and the use of ergot derivatives to control pregnancy-related haemorrhage.9,58–61

AMI can result from significant occlusions secondary to prolonged and intense coronary vasospasm or if there is coronary vasospasm with superimposed thrombosis.52,62 Vasodilators, such as calcium channel blockers and nitroglycerin, are used to treat it, but little has been published regarding diagnostic strategies and therapeutics (Table 1).22

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Pregnancy

Any procedure involving radiation can cause concern for both the healthcare professional and the pregnant woman, and this can influence decision-making regarding PCI. Pregnancy is not a contraindication for PCI; as a life-saving procedure it should be performed when necessary. Management should be determined by a multidisciplinary team consisting of cardiologists, obstetricians, anaesthesiologists and neonatologists, and patients should be treated in an intensive care unit that can provide meticulous maternal monitoring and obstetric care.9,13

Based on ESC guidelines, the best time to perform any PCI procedure is after the fourth month during the second trimester.13 The reasoning behind this is mainly due to the completion of foetal organogenesis, inactive state of the foetal thyroid and the small uterine volume at this time, allowing a greater distance between the foetus and chest than in the later months of pregnancy.

Arterial Access

The latest ESC guidelines recommend that the radial approach by an experienced operator is preferable.13 Femoral artery entry allows direct pelvic radiation, which could theoretically increase the dose absorbed by the foetus. Additionally, there are more technical challenges associated with the femoral approach, due to the presence of the enlarged uterus and difficulties in positioning the woman.19 A recent meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials on radial versus femoral access for PCI in STEMI patients showed that the radial approach is favourable as it is associated with decreased bleeding complications, reduced length of hospital stay and improved patient comfort.63

Ionising Radiation Exposure

Concern regarding PCI in pregnancy usually stems from the risks associated with foetal exposure to ionising radiation. The dose of radiation absorbed and stage of pregnancy can determine the potential risks that ionising radiation exposure poses to the foetus.13,64 The highest levels of risk are during organogenesis and the early foetal period; the risk decreases as pregnancy progresses from the second trimester.65,66 ESC guidelines recommend that during cardiac catheterisation, the mean radiation the unshielded abdomen is exposed to should be 1.5 mGy, where <20% reaches the foetus.13 This dose is far lower than doses reported to be associated with foetal malformation, growth restriction or abortion (>50 mGy).67,68

Use of Iodinated Contrast Agents During Pregnancy

Iodinated contrast material can cross the placenta and enter the foetus;69 however, it has not been reported to cause teratogenic effects.70 Another concern is the potential risk of foetal congenital hypothyroidism.71 A 2010 study showed that there is no serious risk of neonatal hypothyroidism secondary to iodinated contrast agents, but there is a gap in the literature regarding this.72

Methods to Minimise Radiation

Although the mother can be reassured that the risk of radiation to the foetus is small, procedures should follow the radiation dose to be ‘as low as reasonably achievable’ principle (Figure 3). In order to achieve this, the ESC recommends the following manoeuvres:

  • Use echo guidance when possible.
  • Place the source as distant as possible from the patient and the receiver as close as possible.
  • Use only low-dose fluoroscopy.
  • Favour anteroposterior projections.
  • Avoid direct radiation of the abdominal region.
  • Collimate as tightly as possible to the area of interest.
  • Minimise fluoroscopy time.
  • Use an experienced cardiologist.13

Abdominal shielding is of limited benefit as the dose absorbed by the foetus is the result of internal scatter from thoracic tissues rather than direct foetal irradiation from the X-ray beam.13,73

Other techniques suggested to minimise radiation to the patient include using a lower frame rate (7.5 frames/s), using wedge filters, changing the projection frequently to distribute radiation and opening the iris on the television camera, which allows a lower increase in beam intensity.74,75

Stent Selection

The type of stent deployed requires careful consideration, as this affects the duration of antiplatelet therapy after implantation.19 Bare-metal stents are commonly employed for STEMI in pregnancy, especially in the third trimester.19 This allows for interruption of dual antiplatelet therapy at the time of delivery, reducing potential bleeding complications.

New-generation drug-eluting stents are recommended for patients with STEMI who are not pregnant in the 2017 AMI STEMI guidelines, because trials have demonstrated that they are superior to bare-metal stents in patients with AMI, even with the use of short-duration dual antiplatelet therapy.76–78

Special Considerations in P-SCAD

Typically, the arteries in SCAD are prone to iatrogenic dissections and extension of dissections during PCI due to the fragility of the arterial walls.79 It is vital that PCI is undertaken cautiously using meticulous techniques. It may be challenging for the coronary guidewire to enter the true lumen; however, the true lumen can be confirmed using intravascular ultrasound or optical coherence tomography before angioplasty or stenting.29,50 Due to the extensive nature of the dissections, long stents are often necessary despite the increased risk of restenosis.29,50 It is important to note that there is a risk of late stent thrombosis due to the chance of stent malposition after natural resorption of the intramural haematoma.50

Despite radial access being favourable in both STEMI and NSTEMI, femoral access is preferred in PCI for SCAD.50 This is because the radial approach has been associated with higher iatrogenic dissection rates.42,80 However, due to a lack of randomised data, there is no specific recommendation for P-SCAD (Table 1).

Special Considerations for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Open in new tab
Open ppt

Secondary Prevention Post-PCI

ESC guidelines state that low-dose aspirin appears to be safe, but that clopidogrel should only be used when essential and for the shortest possible duration.7,13 Generally, little is known regarding P2Y12 inhibitors in pregnancy and, as such, use of P2Y12 inhibitors other than clopidogrel is not recommended.13 No complications have been reported so far in stented pregnant women treated with aspirin and clopidogrel, but breastfeeding is currently not recommended in women taking antiplatelet medications other than low-dose aspirin.13 There are currently no specific recommendations regarding the duration of antiplatelet therapy in pregnancy, but there is a suggestion in the ESC guidelines that the duration of dual antiplatelets for second- or third-generation drug-eluting stents can be shortened in pregnant women.13 An algorithm for the pharmaceutical management of AMI during pregnancy has been published.81

Timing and Mode of Delivery in Acute MI

ESC guidelines advise that the treatment of STEMI/NSTEMI should not be delayed for delivery.13 In an acute situation, the priority is to stabilise and treat the mother. The timing and mode of delivery (vaginal or elective caesarean section) must be decided based on maternal cardiac status and gestational age.13,20 Although neither mode of delivery is associated with a higher mortality, there is agreement in the literature that vaginal delivery is preferred as there are greater risks associated with anaesthesia and surgery.9,13,20 Based on the ESC guidelines, delivery should ideally be postponed for at least 2 weeks post-AMI as there is increased risk of maternal mortality during this period.13,20 It is critical that the multidisciplinary team, consisting of a cardiologist, obstetrician, anaesthetist and neonatologist, are involved in decision-making regarding treatment and delivery for a good outcome. Post-delivery, maternal monitoring should take place in a high-dependency or intensive care unit.20

Conclusion

Pregnancy increases the risk of AMI and its occurrence is likely to increase with the continuing trend of childbearing at older ages. SCAD is the most common cause of AMI presenting during pregnancy. A conservative approach is generally preferred in P-SCAD but PCI needs to be performed in specific cases for revascularisation. Special considerations should be taken into account before performing PCI due to the fragility of the arteries. According to the latest guidelines, PCI is the recommended strategy for revascularisation in pregnant women presenting with STEMI. Strategies to minimise the radiation dose should be employed and use of the latest-generation drug-eluting stents should be considered.

Many gaps in knowledge exist regarding AMI in pregnancy,
which are largely due to the rarity of the condition and low involvement of pregnant women in clinical research. However, large international population-based studies on P-SCAD, coronary embolism, coronary artery vasospasm and PCI in pregnancy are required to better understand the aetiology and optimal management of these conditions.

References
  1. Ouzounian JG, Elkayam U. Physiologic changes during normal pregnancy and delivery. Cardiol Clin 2012;30:317–29.
    Crossref | PubMed
  2. Chapman AB, Abraham WT, Zamudio S, et al. Temporal relationships between hormonal and hemodynamic changes in early human pregnancy. Kidney Int 1998;54:2056–63.
    Crossref | PubMed
  3. Nelson-Piercy C, Chakravarti S. Cardiac disease and pregnancy. Anaesthesia & Intensive Care Medicine 2007;8:312–6.
    Crossref
  4. Knight M, Nair M, Tuffnell D, et al. Saving Lives, Improving Mothers’ Care. Lessons learned to inform future maternity care from the UK and Ireland Confidential Enquiries into Maternal Deaths and Morbidity 2013–2015. Oxford: National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, 2017.
  5. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Cardiac Disease and Pregnancy (Good Practice No. 13). London: RCOG, 2011.
  6. Poh CL, Lee CH. Acute myocardial infarction in pregnant women. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2010;39:247–53.
    PubMed
  7. Elkayam U, Jalnapurkar S, Barakkat MN, et al. Pregnancy-associated acute myocardial infarction: a review of contemporary experience in 150 cases between 2006 and 2011. Circulation 2014;129:1695–702.
    Crossref | PubMed
  8. Honigberg MC, Zekavat SM, Aragam K, et al. Long-term cardiovascular risk in women with hypertension during pregnancy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2019;74:2743–54.
    Crossref | PubMed
  9. Roth A, Elkayam U. Acute myocardial infarction associated with pregnancy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008;52:171–80.
    Crossref | PubMed
  10. Roos-Hesselink JW, Duvekot JJ, Thorne SA. Pregnancy in high risk cardiac conditions. Heart 2009;95:680–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  11. Udell JA, Lu H, Redelmeier DA. Long-term cardiovascular risk in women prescribed fertility therapy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;62:1704–12.
    Crossref | PubMed
  12. Dayan N, Filion KB, Okano M, et al. Cardiovascular risk following fertility therapy: Systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;70:1203–13.
    Crossref | PubMed
  13. Regitz-Zagrosek V, Roos-Hesselink JW, Bauersachs J, et al; ESC Scientific Document Group ESCSD. 2018 ESC Guidelines for the management of cardiovascular diseases during pregnancy. Eur Heart J 2018;39:3165–241.
    Crossref | PubMed
  14. Roth A, Elkayam U. Acute myocardial infarction associated with pregnancy. Ann Intern Med 1996;125:751–62.
    Crossref | PubMed
  15. Kealey AJ. Coronary artery disease and myocardial infarction in pregnancy: a review of epidemiology, diagnosis, and medical and surgical management. Can J Cardiol 2010;26:e185–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  16. Ahmed R, Dunford J, Mehran R, et al. Pre-eclampsia and future cardiovascular risk among women: a review. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;63:1815–22.
    Crossref | PubMed
  17. James AH, Jamison MG, Biswas MS, et al. Acute myocardial infarction in pregnancy: a United States population-based study. Circulation 2006;113:1564–71.
    Crossref | PubMed
  18. Elkayam U, Goland S, Pieper PG, Silversides CK. High-risk cardiac disease in pregnancy: Part 1. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;68:396–410.
    Crossref | PubMed
  19. Ismail S, Wong C, Rajan P, Vidovich MI. ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction in pregnancy: 2016 update. Clinical Cardiol 2017;40:399–406.
    Crossref | PubMed
  20. Wuntakal R, Shetty N, Ioannou E, et al. Myocardial infarction and pregnancy. The Obstetrician & Gynaecologist 2013;15:247–55.
    Crossref
  21. Amsterdam EA, Wenger NK, Brindis RG, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation 2014;130:e344–426.
    Crossref | PubMed
  22. Iadanza A, Del Pasqua A, Barbati R, et al. Acute ST elevation myocardial infarction in pregnancy due to coronary vasospasm: a case report and review of literature. Int J Cardiol 2007;115:81–5.
    Crossref | PubMed
  23. El Makki AB, Malki M, Faliouni H, Sabry M. Prosthetic thrombosis and coronary embolism during pregnancy: a delicate situation of antithrombotic therapy management. Med Pharm Rep 2019;92:300.
    Crossref | PubMed
  24. Agostoni P, Gasparini G, Destro G. Acute myocardial infarction probably caused by paradoxical embolus in a pregnant woman. Heart 2004;90:e12. ,
    Crossref | PubMed
  25. Varadarajan P, Isaeff D, Pai RG. Prosthetic valve thrombosis presenting as an acute embolic myocardial infarction in a pregnant patient: issues on anticoagulation regimens and thrombolytic therapy. Echocardiography 2006;23:774–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  26. Nishiguchi T, Tanaka A, Ozaki Y, et al. Prevalence of spontaneous coronary artery dissection in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care 2016;5:263–70.
    Crossref | PubMed
  27. Saw J, Aymong E, Mancini GBJ, et al. Nonatherosclerotic coronary artery disease in young women. Can J Cardiol 2014;30:814–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  28. Saw J, Starovoytov A, Humphries K, et al. Canadian spontaneous coronary artery dissection cohort study: in-hospital and 30-day outcomes. Eur Heart J 2019;40:1188–97.
    Crossref | PubMed
  29. Vijayaraghavan R, Verma S, Gupta N, Saw J. Pregnancy-related spontaneous coronary artery dissection. Circulation 2014;130:1915–20. .
    Crossref | PubMed
  30. Aziz S. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection. E-Journal of Cardiology Practice 2017;14:38.
  31. Apfelbaum JL, Hawkins JL, Agarkar M, et al. Practice Guidelines for Obstetric Anesthesia: An Updated Report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Obstetric Anesthesia and the Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology*. Anesthesiology 2016;124:270–300.
    Crossref | PubMed
  32. Tweet MS, Hayes SN, Codsi E, et al. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection associated with pregnancy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017;70:426–35.
    Crossref | PubMed
  33. Rajagopalan S, Nwazota N, Chandrasekhar S. Outcomes in pregnant women with acute aortic dissections: a review of the literature from 2003 to 2013. Int J Obstet Anesth 2014;23:348–56.
    Crossref | PubMed
  34. Adlam D, García-Guimaraes M, Maas AHEM. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection: no longer a rare disease. Eur Heart J 2019;40:1198–201.
    Crossref | PubMed
  35. Tweet MS, Hayes SN, Pitta SR, et al. Clinical features, management, and prognosis of spontaneous coronary artery dissection. Circulation 2012;126:579–88.
    Crossref | PubMed
  36. Saw JWL, Prakash R, Starovoytov A, et al. Cardiovascular outcomes in a large prospectively followed single-center cohort of spontaneous coronary artery dissection patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;67:S457.
    Crossref
  37. Henkin S, Negrotto SM, Tweet MS, et al. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection and its association with heritable connective tissue disorders. Heart 2016;102:876–81.
    Crossref | PubMed
  38. Tweet MS, Eleid MF, Best PJM, et al. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection: revascularization versus conservative therapy. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2014;7:777–86.
    Crossref | PubMed
  39. Vrints CJM. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection. Heart 2010;96:801–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  40. Almeda FQ, Barkatullah S, Kavinsky CJ. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection. Clin Cardiol 2004;27:377–80.
    Crossref | PubMed
  41. Goh ACH, Lundstrom RJ. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection with cardiac tamponade. Tex Heart Inst J 2015;42:479–82.
    Crossref | PubMed
  42. Saw J, Aymong E, Sedlak T, et al. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection: association with predisposing arteriopathies and precipitating stressors and cardiovascular outcomes. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2014;7:645–55.
    Crossref | PubMed
  43. Hayes SN, Kim ESH, Saw J, et al. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection: Current state of the science: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2018;137:e523–57.
    Crossref | PubMed
  44. Adlam D, Alfonso F, Maas A, Vrints C. European Society of Cardiology, Acute Cardiovascular Care Association, SCAD Study Group: a position paper on spontaneous coronary artery dissection. Eur Heart J 2018;39:3353–68.
    Crossref | PubMed
  45. McGregor AJ, Barron R, Rosene-Montella K. The pregnant heart: Cardiac emergencies during pregnancy. Am J Emerg Med 2015;33:573–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  46. Ito H, Taylor L, Bowman M, et al. Presentation and therapy of spontaneous coronary artery dissection and comparisons of postpartum versus nonpostpartum cases. Am J Cardiol 2011;107:1590–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  47. Chatzizisis YS, Giannoglou GD, Parcharidis GE, Louridas GE. Is left coronary system more susceptible to atherosclerosis than right?: A pathophysiological insight. Int J Cardiol 2007;116:7–13.
    Crossref | PubMed
  48. Alfonso F, Paulo M, Lennie V, et al. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection: Long-term follow-up of a large series of patients prospectively managed with a “conservative” therapeutic strategy. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2012;5:1062–70.
    Crossref | PubMed
  49. Lettieri C, Zavalloni D, Rossini R, et al. Management and long-term prognosis of spontaneous coronary artery dissection. Am J Cardiol 2015;116:66­–73.
    Crossref | PubMed
  50. Saw J, Mancini GBJ, Humphries KH. Contemporary review on spontaneous coronary artery dissection. J Am Coll Cardiol 2016;68:297–312.
    Crossref | PubMed
  51. Ashrafi R, Curtis SL. Heart disease and pregnancy. Cardiol Ther 2017;6:157–73.
    Crossref | PubMed
  52. Mirza A. Myocardial infarction resulting from nonatherosclerotic coronary artery diseases. Am J Emerg Med 2003;21:578–84.
    Crossref | PubMed
  53. Denas G, Jose SP, Bracco A, et al. Antiphospholipid syndrome and the heart: a case series and literature review. Autoimmun Rev 2015;14:214–22.
    Crossref | PubMed
  54. Dagre A, Kouris N, Olympios C. Coronary artery disease: Not always the case for ST-elevation myocardial infarction. J Invasive Cardiol 2012;24:E142–4.
    PubMed
  55. Raphael CE, Heit JA, Reeder GS, et al. Coronary embolus: an underappreciated cause of acute coronary syndromes. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2018;11:172–80.
    Crossref | PubMed
  56. Beltrame JF, Crea F, Kaski JC, et al. International standardization of diagnostic criteria for vasospastic angina. Eur Heart J 2017;38:2565–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  57. Pristipino C, Beltrame JF, Finocchiaro ML, et al. Major racial differences in coronary constrictor response between Japanese and Caucasians with recent myocardial infarction. Circulation 2000;101:1102–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  58. Gant NF, Daley GL, Chand S, et al. A study of angiotensin II pressor response throughout primigravid pregnancy. J Clin Invest 1973;52:2682–9.
    Crossref | PubMed
  59. Nisell H, Hjemdahl P, Linde B. Cardiovascular responses to circulating catecholamines in normal pregnancy and in pregnancy‐induced hypertension. Clin Physiol 1985;5:479–93.
    Crossref | PubMed
  60. Sasse L, Wagner R, Murray FE. Transmural myocardial infarction during pregnancy. Am J Cardiol 1975;35:448–52.
    Crossref | PubMed
  61. Lin YH, Seow KM, Hwang JL, Chen HH. Myocardial infarction and mortality caused by methylergonovine. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2005;84:1022.
    Crossref | PubMed
  62. Tun A, Khan IA. Myocardial infarction with normal coronary arteries: the pathologic and clinical perspectives. Angiology 2001;52:299–304.
    Crossref | PubMed
  63. Karrowni W, Vyas A, Giacomino B, et al. Radial versus femoral access for primary percutaneous interventions in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2013;6:814–23.
    Crossref | PubMed
  64. American College of Radiology. ACR–SPR practice parameter for imaging pregnant or potentially pregnant adolescents and women with ionizing radiation. 2013. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2015.
  65. Ray JG, Vermeulen MJ, Bharatha A, et al. Association between MRI exposure during pregnancy and fetal and childhood outcomes. JAMA 2016;316:952–61.
    Crossref | PubMed
  66. Shaw P, Duncan A, Vouyouka A, Ozsvath K. Radiation exposure and pregnancy. J Vasc Surg 2011;53:28S–34S.
    Crossref | PubMed
  67. Pieper PG, Hoendermis ES, Drijver YN. Cardiac surgery and percutaneous intervention in pregnant women with heart disease. Neth Heart J 2012;20:125–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  68. Gjelsteen AC, Ching BH, Meyermann MW, et al. CT, MRI, PET, PET/CT, and ultrasound in the evaluation of obstetric and gynecologic patients. Surg Clin North Am 2008;88:361–90.
    Crossref | PubMed
  69. Webb JAW, Thomsen HS, Morcos SK; Members of Contrast Media Safety Committee of European Society of Urogenital Radiology. The use of iodinated and gadolinium contrast media during pregnancy and lactation. Eur Radiol 2005;15:1234–40.
    Crossref | PubMed
  70. Wagner LK, Applegate K; American College of Radiology. ACR practice guideline for imaging pregnant or potentially pregnant adolescents and women with ionizing radiation. American College of Radiology Practice Guideline. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2011.
  71. Thomsen HS. European Society of Urogenital Radiology (ESUR) guidelines on the safe use of iodinated contrast media. Eur J Radiol 2006;60:307–13.
    Crossref | PubMed
  72. Bourjeily G, Chalhoub M, Phornphutkul C, et al. Neonatal thyroid function: Effect of a single exposure to iodinated contrast medium in utero. Radiology 2010;256:744–50.
    Crossref | PubMed
  73. Dauer LT, Thornton RH, Miller DL, et al. Radiation management for interventions using fluoroscopic or computed tomographic guidance during pregnancy: a joint guideline of the Society of Interventional Radiology and the Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiological Society of Europe with Endorsement by the Canadian Interventional Radiology Association. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2012;23:19–32.
    Crossref | PubMed
  74. Vijayalakshmi K, Kelly D, Chapple CL, et al. Cardiac catheterisation: Radiation doses and lifetime risk of malignancy. Heart 2007;93:370–1.
    Crossref | PubMed
  75. Kuba K, Wolfe D, Schoenfeld AH, Bortnick AE. Percutaneous coronary intervention in pregnancy: Modeling of the fetal absorbed dose. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol 2019;2019:8410203.
    Crossref | PubMed
  76. Ibanez B, James S, Agewall S, et al. 2017 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J 2017;39:119–77.
    Crossref | PubMed
  77. Räber L, Kelbæk H, Ostojic M, et al. Effect of biolimus-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer vs bare-metal stents on cardiovascular events among patients with acute myocardial infarction: the COMFORTABLE AMI randomized trial. JAMA 2012;308:777–87.
    Crossref | PubMed
  78. Sabate M, Cequier A, Iñiguez A, et al. Everolimus-eluting stent versus bare-metal stent in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (EXAMINATION): 1 year results of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2012;380:1482–90.
    Crossref | PubMed
  79. Macaya F, Salinas P, Gonzalo N, et al. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection: contemporary aspects of diagnosis and patient management. Open Heart 2018;5:e000884.
    Crossref | PubMed
  80. Prakash R, Starovoytov A, Heydari M, et al. TCT-386 Iatrogenic catheter-induced dissection during angiography of patients with spontaneous coronary artery dissection. J Am Coll Cardiol 2015;66:B155–6.
    Crossref
  81. Edupuganti MM, Ganga V. Acute myocardial infarction in pregnancy: Current diagnosis and management approaches. Indian Heart J 2019;71:367–74.
    Crossref | PubMed