{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.05426356589147287, 'fraction_numerical': 0.03433001107419712, 'mean_word_length': 5.23448275862069, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Myocardial Bridging: A Meta‐Analysis of Prevalence

The main objective of this article was to analyze prevalence data about myocardial bridging (MB) in published studies. To this purpose, we performed a meta‐analysis of studies published in English literature that contained data about the prevalence of MB and its anatomical characteristics. The overall prevalence was 19% (CI: 17–21%); autopsy studies revealed an overall prevalence of 42% (CI: 30–55%), CT studies 22% (CI: 18–25%), and coronary angiography 6% (CI: 5–8%). Most bridges were located on the left anterior descending artery (82% overall, 63% on autopsy studies), had a mean thickness of 2.47 mm and a mean length of 19.3 mm. In conclusion, autopsy studies should be the gold standard in evaluating the actual prevalence of myocardial bridges, while in vivo high‐resolution CT scanning should be preferred to coronary angiography studies.