Direct answer. Myocardial bridging is a congenital coronary segment passing through heart muscle, which can compress the artery. An incidental bridge and a bridge implicated in symptoms are different clinical questions. Selected patient explanation. Confidence: moderate for anatomy and assessment distinctions, limited for predicting individual risk or comparative treatment benefit. This review establishes no independent drug, device, surgery or supplement efficacy verdict.
- The bridge’s anatomy does not by itself establish why someone has chest pain.
- Ask whether the assessment shows restricted blood supply and what else may contribute.
- Medication and intervention choices require the exact clinical mechanism and anatomy.
- Competitive-sport advice must refer to symptoms, assessment and the intended activity.
- Serious new chest symptoms require urgent assessment even with a known bridge.
Table of contents
- Evidence summary
- Myocardial bridge and tunneled artery: the anatomy
- Dynamic compression differs from a fixed plaque narrowing
- Symptoms and an incidental scan finding
- Anatomical imaging and functional testing answer different questions
- Coexisting coronary disease and spasm need their own assessment
- Medicines and selected procedures: what to discuss
- Competitive sport, recreation and return to activity
- Urgent chest symptoms and catheter-procedure concerns
- Side effects, interactions and a complete product list
- Supplements, continuing review and evidence limitations
- Funding and source roles
- Frequently asked questions
- Sources and funding notes
Evidence summary
Clinical guidance, human outcome research and funding independence answer different questions. The guidance below explains care; it does not independently reproduce the trials behind a medicine or supplement.
| Claim / intervention | Evidence reviewed | Funding / conflicts | Interpretation / limits |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anatomy and dynamic flow | Original anatomy statement; Indexed specialist review | Named research grants for 2016; later review author device consultancy and study-chain gaps. | Mechanism context, no quantitative forecast. |
| Medicine or selected intervention | Provider explanation | Mixed provider/advertising revenue; exact individual/page allocations unclosed. | Care categories, no guaranteed relief or ranked procedure. |
| Competitive-sport assessment | 2025 original Table9 | Actual relevant commercial author declarations and mixed society routes. | Individual assessment framework, not clearance. |
| Medicine/product safety | Current public medicine guide; Interaction guide | National website policy; underlying expert/trial receipts unclosed. | Generic precautions, no dose or withdrawal schedule. |
Myocardial bridge and tunneled artery: the anatomy
The artery segment travels within myocardium, while the overlying muscle is the bridge. It often involves the left anterior descending artery but can involve others. Selected terminology. Ask which segment is present on your own report rather than assuming that all bridges are identical.
The word “bridge” can sound like a blockage that must be removed, but the clinical consultation needs a more precise question: what is the finding and what effect does it have? Request a clear account of the relevant images. If another team reviews the case, bring the report and images rather than only a diagram copied from the internet. The visible anatomy should be connected to the rest of the assessment before drawing conclusions about treatment.
Dynamic compression differs from a fixed plaque narrowing
The dated specialist review describes a dynamic effect varying with the cardiac cycle, heart rate and sympathetic tone. Selected flow explanation. The 2016 statement discusses faster-heart-rate effects and reduced diastolic coronary flow in proposed exercise-related ischemia. Selected mechanism context. These explanations are not an individual prognosis.
Ask which mechanism the clinician believes is relevant: compression of the tunneled segment, another coronary problem or a combination. What supports that interpretation, and what remains uncertain? A measurement made under one set of conditions should be interpreted by the team that performed it. This article supplies no compression-percentage cutoff, provocative-drug protocol or heart-rate limit for deciding that a bridge is clinically significant.
Symptoms and an incidental scan finding
Cleveland describes chest pain associated with exertion or emotional stress, possible breathlessness, palpitations and dizziness, and findings discovered incidentally. Selected presentation. Having a bridge on a scan does not make every episode a bridge-related symptom.
Give a specific history of what happens during activity, at rest or after it. Was there fainting, a change in exercise tolerance or a new symptom pattern? Ask how the findings fit that history and whether the clinical impression is confirmed or provisional. Do not deliberately provoke symptoms to test the diagnosis yourself. If a finding emerged while investigating another condition, ask which parts of the original problem still require assessment. Serious new symptoms should follow an urgent-care pathway, not be deferred because an earlier report supplied a reassuring label.
Anatomical imaging and functional testing answer different questions
The specialist review separates anatomical assessment from functional/hemodynamic assessment and discusses coronary CT and intravascular techniques. Selected investigation categories. These tests are not interchangeable: ask whether the purpose is to see the route or investigate its physiological consequences.
For each proposed test, ask what result would change the decision. Does a normal result answer the question about anatomy, exertional blood supply or a different symptom mechanism? Ask whether uncertainty remains and why another examination is needed. Bring the formal interpretation to follow-up. This guide does not label catheter optical-coherence imaging noninvasive, rank every available test or provide a home exercise challenge. It offers no invasive-pressure, drug-provocation or scan-preparation regimen.
Coexisting coronary disease and spasm need their own assessment
The 2021 review discusses coronary atherosclerosis, vasospasm and microvascular dysfunction alongside a bridge. Selected coexisting-cause discussion. The care question may therefore be broader than whether the artery passes beneath muscle. No causal diagnosis can be made from that list.
Ask which coexisting condition has actually been diagnosed and which is only being considered. How would that distinction change the treatment goal? If a medicine is offered, request an explanation of whether it addresses the bridge-associated symptoms, a rhythm or blood-pressure problem, spasm or another coronary diagnosis. Different clinical questions should not be collapsed into “treat the bridge.” This article does not justify adding aspirin, cholesterol medicine or a vasodilator solely because an imaging report contains that phrase.
Medicines and selected procedures: what to discuss
Cleveland lists beta blockers or calcium-channel blockers among medicines used for symptomatic patients, and selected myotomy/unroofing or bypass procedures. Selected care categories. Those categories do not establish the best option for a particular anatomy, or prove a comparative symptom or survival benefit in this review.
Ask what outcome the proposed treatment seeks to improve, how the team will assess the response and which alternatives were considered. If an intervention is proposed, ask why medicines and further assessment are insufficient, how the normal artery will be protected and what risks or continuing symptoms are possible. A simple rule based on bridge length or depth cannot choose a procedure for you. This article does not rank stents, surgical methods or operators, and does not tell anyone to start, stop or adjust cardiac medicine.
Competitive sport, recreation and return to activity
The 2025 AHA/ACC sports statement distinguishes an incidental asymptomatic bridge from symptomatic athletes needing assessment for inducible ischemia. Persistent ischemia changes the clinical participation discussion. Selected current Table9 distinction. The statement concerns competitive athletes; it is not a blanket restriction or a self-issued clearance for every person with a bridge.
Request advice tied to your symptoms, assessment and actual activity: recreational walking, school sport, training and competition may pose different questions. Ask who documents the decision and what changes require review. After surgery, ask how recovery and testing inform return to activity. This article supplies no waiting period, treadmill protocol, target heart rate or permission to compete. Shared decision-making means an informed discussion with the responsible clinician, rather than selecting a favourable quotation from someone else’s clearance.
Urgent chest symptoms and catheter-procedure concerns
Seek emergency help for severe/tight chest pain, spreading pain, serious breathing difficulty, blue/grey coloration or collapse with abnormal responsiveness. Current emergency recognition. A known bridge must not be used to dismiss a possible heart attack or another acute problem. Use local emergency services and do not drive yourself when seriously unwell.
GSTT’s angiogram information describes a catheter, contrast and X-rays, and consent concerns including bleeding, vascular injury, contrast reactions, kidney effects and serious complications. Selected procedure context. Ask why an invasive test is proposed and disclose relevant allergies, kidney problems and possible pregnancy. Follow the team’s preparation/aftercare instructions; this article provides no medication withholding, fluid intake or postprocedure waiting schedule.
Side effects, interactions and a complete product list
NHS beta-blocker guidance lists dizziness/tiredness and suitability concerns including breathing disease, heart block and low blood pressure; other medicines or alcohol can add problems. Selected generic precautions. These are reasons for prescriber/pharmacist review, not a universal ban or proof that a symptom is a drug effect.
NHS verapamil guidance flags interactions with other blood-pressure-lowering medicines and products such as St John’s wort or grapefruit-containing supplements. Selected interaction examples. Bring the actual names and labels, including nonprescription medicines. Ask which combinations require attention, what symptoms warrant contact and who reviews the plan. NCCIH warns that supplements can affect bleeding or anesthesia. Generic procedure/product precautions. This guide gives no replacement drug, withdrawal schedule or claim that an unlisted supplement is safe.
Supplements, continuing review and evidence limitations
No independently cleared supplement benefit for treating a myocardial bridge is established here. A claim about circulation does not demonstrate relief of clinically relevant compression or a meaningful patient outcome. NCCIH supplies dated generic safety context, not bridge-specific efficacy. Selected safety source.
Keep the diagnosis, test interpretations, medicine plan and activity advice together. Ask what should trigger reassessment if symptoms or exercise demands change. Different specialist narratives and dated observational evidence should not be converted into a precise personal forecast. Maker/developer-produced efficacy is excluded from the independent verdict. Animal, laboratory and developmental findings are not used as evidence of clinical benefit; none establish a safe drug regimen or sports clearance in a person.
Funding and source roles
Who paid for the evidence?
Follow named sources to the funding and relationships disclosed in this article. Numbered article disclosures preserve notes where a source is not identified. A public or university name alone does not establish independence.
View 22 more funding disclosures
This graphic reorganizes the article's disclosures; it is not a new financial audit or independence classification. Highlighted notes show different funding relationships where available. Review funding is separate from underlying trial funding. Disclosure is not proof of falsehood, and no declared conflict is not proof of complete independence.
Clinical roles are separated from financial originals below. Known device consultancy and drug/device author interests limit claims of independence. Audited society/provider accounts, advertising policies and public appropriations describe institutional routes, without clearing named pages, original studies or individual receipts. Public-repository hosting is not evidence that a review was government-funded. These sources support care discussion, not independent comparative treatment efficacy.
| Source | Funding / backers | Country / jurisdiction | Independence | Credibility / incentives / gaps |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cleveland Clinic: myocardial bridge, 30 January 2024 | Mixed provider receipts; audited accounts, advertising and editorial process separate. Exact reviewer/page and source-study financial chains unclosed. | United States; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. | Tier 2 provider clinical context, provisional. | C provisional — actual selected body/date read. Professional review aids accuracy; referral/reputation incentives, simplification and unclosed individual interests remain. No independent efficacy or personal eligibility conclusion. |
| JACC: 2021 myocardial-bridge review, indexed original | Separate original author declaration documents device consultancy. Exact review-production and source-trial receipts unclosed. | United States; Mount Sinai New York authors; Fuster also CNIC, Spain. | Tier 3 financially connected author clinical synthesis. | C provisional — indexed original read, direct full403. Peer accountability aids accuracy; commercial ties, dated narrative and study-chain gaps remain. |
| PubMed: actual 2021 review author-declaration record, indexed | Sharma declares consultant fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific and Cardiovascular Systems; other authors report no relevant relationships. No individual receipt ledger or source-trial chain retrieved. | United States/Spain author affiliations; NLM repository is not the review’s funder. | Tier 3 original author financial declaration, public indexed record. | C provisional — complete indexed declaration read; direct page body incomplete. Specific named interests aid scrutiny; self-report and full receipt gaps remain. |
| AHA/ACC: original 2025 sports statement, 88-page author manuscript | Appendix reports relevant drug/device interests, including Ackerman ownership/advisory and Day commercial research/consulting. Separate AHA accounts, corporate funding and ACC commercial policy. Project/underlying-study receipts unclosed. | United States joint societies; multinational writing group. UK university repository hosts the manuscript, not an inferred research funder. | Tier 3 financially connected expert/society clinical framework. | C provisional — selected Table9, scope and actual appendix read. Professional disclosure aids accuracy; consensus, commercial interests and individual applicability remain limits. |
| NHS: heart attack, 31 March 2026 | National website funding policy separate. Exact contributor/page and supporting-study receipts unclosed. | United Kingdom; national NHS information, distinct from provider trusts. | Tier 2 public care context, provisional. | C provisional — actual dated body read. Public care accountability aids accuracy; simplified general guidance and unclosed source-study/individual interests limit interpretation. |
| NHS: beta blockers, 4 September 2026 | National website funding policy separate. Exact contributor/page and supporting-study receipts unclosed. | United Kingdom; national NHS information, distinct from provider trusts. | Tier 2 public care context, provisional. | C provisional — actual dated body read. Public care accountability aids accuracy; simplified general guidance and unclosed source-study/individual interests limit interpretation. |
| NHS: verapamil interactions, 13 March 2025 | National website funding policy separate. Exact contributor/page and supporting-study receipts unclosed. | United Kingdom; national NHS information, distinct from provider trusts. | Tier 2 public care context, provisional. | C provisional — actual dated body read. Public care accountability aids accuracy; simplified general guidance and unclosed source-study/individual interests limit interpretation. |
| GSTT: coronary angiogram, March 2026 version4 | Separate audited provider accounts. Exact leaflet/reviewer and source-study receipts unclosed. | United Kingdom; Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London. | Tier 2 provider procedure context, provisional. | C provisional — actual full dated leaflet read. Consent accountability aids accuracy; generic reassurance and unclosed financial chain limit use. |
| ESC working group: original coronary-anatomy position statement, 2016, 13 pages | Declares no conflicts; lists MINECO BFU2012-35799, MINECO-ISCIII TERCEL RD12/0019/0022, EU FP7 CardioNet PITN-GA-2011-289600, and Venice Registry for Cardio-Cerebro-Vascular Pathology support. Registry ultimate backers, full receipts and supporting-study chains unclosed. Current society commercial routes separate. | Multinational European authors; current society headquarters France, separately traced. | Tier 3 society clinical framework; material institutional commercial routes, author declaration distinct. | C provisional — selected original anatomy and declarations read. Named grants aid tracing; dated synthesis, unclosed registry backing and all underlying evidence remain limits. |
| ESC: actual current funding-model original | Membership, congress/events, scientific publishing, education/accreditation and life-science/medtech partnerships. Own model describes French-GAAP statements and statutory audit; full underlying accounts not read here. | France; society headquarters separately traced; multinational professional membership. | Tier 3 institutional commercial-route self-report. | B provisional for described routes — actual body read. Financial oversight supports traceability; partnership incentives and historical page/project allocations remain unclosed. |
| ESC: actual current offices original | Own identity/contact disclosure; financial channels separately traced above. | France; main headquarters European Heart House, Sophia Antipolis. Separate administrative office Brussels, Belgium. | Tier 3 institutional identity self-report. | B provisional — actual headquarters body read. Direct identity aids jurisdiction tracing; address alone cannot establish evidence independence. |
| Cleveland Clinic: original audited 2025/2024 accounts | Provider statutory report; externally audited by EY. Patient/payer revenue, advisory services, research grants, corporate/foundation/individual pledges and investments. | United States; Cleveland Clinic Health System, Cleveland, Ohio. | Tier 3 provider financial self-report with external audit. | B, provisional — issued 9 March 2026, complete 75-page original accessed and relevant notes read. Audit concerns the accounts, not this article or intervention trials. |
| Cleveland Clinic: advertising policy | Site accepts advertising/sponsor revenue; provider retains content/placement approval and states editorial separation. | United States; Cleveland, Ohio. | Tier 3 own commercial-policy disclosure. | B, provisional — policy itself read; January 2020 guidelines state they can change. Actual page advertiser amounts and compliance not independently audited. |
| Cleveland Clinic: editorial policy | Institutional writing and expert-review process; mixed provider funds above, no individual reviewer-payment ledger. | United States; Cleveland, Ohio. | Tier 3 own process disclosure. | B, provisional — actual policy describes professional writers and medical-expert review. Accuracy incentive is credible; an institutional perspective and unverified individual conflicts remain. |
| National NHS website content and funding policy, 2022 | Own 2022 policy says DHSC funds the national website, which rejects advertising/corporate sponsorship and requires staff/outside-agent interest reporting. This does not certify each supporting study or hospital’s finances. | United Kingdom; national NHS England information, registered contact Leeds; individual provider finances separate. | Tier 3 institutional financial/contact self-disclosure. | B provisional for explicitly dated institutional provenance. Statutory/public scrutiny favors accuracy; institutional reporting incentives and allocation gaps remain. Financial context only. |
| Guy’s and St Thomas’ own 2025–2026 audited accounts | Own 2025–2026 audited notes3–4: NHS/public commissioner and private-patient income; R&D, education, services and charitable/grant contributions. Directors’ report names Johnson & Johnson Managed Services, Diaverum and Active Care Group partnerships, plus venture/commercial routes. These do not establish payment for a particular leaflet. Full donor, author and page/trial allocations unclosed. | United Kingdom; Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust, London, England. | Tier 3 institutional financial/contact self-disclosure. | B provisional for explicitly dated institutional provenance. Statutory/public scrutiny favors accuracy; institutional reporting incentives and allocation gaps remain. Financial context only. |
| NCCIH: using dietary supplements wisely, January 2019 | Separate appropriations history and Gift Fund authority. Exact page/contributor/source-study allocations unclosed. | United States; NIH/HHS NCCIH, Bethesda, Maryland. | Tier 2 public safety context, provisional. | C provisional — actual generic safety body read. Scientific accountability favors accuracy; dated summary and unresolved study finances do not establish myocardial-bridge treatment benefit. |
| NCCIH: original appropriations history | Own historical table reports congressional appropriations through FY2024, reflecting supplements/transfers. No current FY2026 receipts or page allocations inferred. | United States; NCCIH/NIH, Bethesda, Maryland. | Tier 3 institutional financial self-report. | B, provisional — actual table/body read. Direct fiscal trace helps; older table and absent page ledger remain limits. |
| NCCIH: original Gift Fund authority | Authorized donations/bequests use a separate Gift Fund, with conditional/unconditional purposes. Named donor receipts and clinical-page allocation unclosed. | United States; own budget office, 31 Center Drive, Bethesda, Maryland. | Tier 3 financial/process self-report. | B, provisional — actual body and address read. Direct authority aids tracing; permission is not evidence of a named receipt. |
| AHA: actual audited FY2024/2025 accounts, 31 pages | Contributions, events, bequests, government grants, programme/educational sales, dues, investment and royalty income. Accounts also describe healthcare venture interests and a Laerdal resuscitation partnership; not a bridge-page/project allocation. | United States; national centre Dallas, Texas, separately traced. | Tier 3 institutional financial report with independent audit. | B provisional for fiscal routes — actual selected accounts/audit read. Audit/accountability aids tracing; institutional totals and venture interests cannot clear clinical evidence or individual payments. |
| AHA: actual FY2024/2025 pharmaceutical/device funding disclosure | Unrestricted corporate gifts, event/programme sponsorship and service fees, including pharmaceutical, biotechnology and device funding; figures include earned/committed funds, some received later. | United States; AHA national centre Dallas, Texas. | Tier 3 institutional commercial-funding self-report. | B provisional for declared channels — actual text read. Disclosure aids scrutiny; committed amounts differ from received cash and exact statement allocations remain unclosed. |
| AHA: actual national-centre contact original | Own contact/identity disclosure; audited and commercial routes separate above. | United States; 7272 Greenville Avenue, Dallas, Texas. | Tier 3 institutional identity self-report. | B provisional — actual address body read. Direct provenance helps; identity alone cannot clear independence. |
| ACC: actual advertising/sponsorship policy | Own policy permits industry advertising and sponsorship, with stated editorial separation and sponsor acknowledgement. Actual current compliance, receipts and statement transfers unclosed. | United States; Washington DC, separately traced. | Tier 3 commercial-policy self-disclosure. | B provisional for described channels — actual body read. Disclosure/accountability favors traceability; industry relationships and implementation gaps remain. |
| ACC: actual 2025 financial overview index | Own page explicitly labels 2025 figures preliminary and unaudited as of March 2026. Linked full report exceeded retrieval-size limit; no image-only revenue categories or amounts adopted. | United States; American College of Cardiology, Washington DC. | Tier 3 institution financial-status self-report. | C provisional — actual dated index read. Explicit unaudited status aids scrutiny; full financial ledger, receipts and project allocations remain incomplete. |
| ACC: actual current contact original | Own identity/contact disclosure; commercial policy and financial-access gap separate above. | United States; Heart House, 2400 N Street NW, Washington DC. | Tier 3 institutional identity self-report. | B provisional — actual address body read. Direct provenance helps; identity does not establish independence. |
Frequently asked questions
Does an incidental bridge prove the cause of chest pain? Ask how the anatomical finding relates to the symptom and functional assessment.
Is the bridge the same as plaque blockage? The mechanisms differ and can require separate assessment; ask what is demonstrated in your case.
Must everyone have surgery? A procedure decision requires the anatomy, clinical problem and alternatives, not the label alone.
Can I copy an athlete’s exercise plan? Request advice for your assessment and intended activity.
Can I change cardiac medicine after reading a review? Ask the prescribing team to interpret the evidence and reconcile the complete product list.
Sources and funding notes
Actual January 2024 Cleveland body and selected 2016 original mechanisms/declarations read. JACC2021 selected full indexed publisher text and original indexed PubMed financial declaration read; direct full access failed. The 2025 sports88-page author manuscript, scope/Table9/appendix, own AHA audited31-page accounts/commercial text/contact and ACC policy/contact/unaudited-index bodies were read. Primary clinical care and medicine sources are dated as shown. Outcome percentages, blanket stent or anatomy-based procedure rankings, personal dosing and clearance are excluded. Complete study/payment chains remain unclosed; source concentration is primarily US/European/UK.
- Cleveland Clinic: myocardial bridge, 30 January 2024 — Selected presentation and treatment categories; erroneous noninvasive-OCT label, blanket procedure ranking and prognosis rates excluded.
- JACC: 2021 myocardial-bridge review, indexed original — Selected mechanism/assessment only; no independent efficacy.
- PubMed: actual 2021 review author-declaration record, indexed — Financial trace only; not a clinical outcome study.
- AHA/ACC: original 2025 sports statement, 88-page author manuscript — Competitive-sport evaluation distinction only; no personal clearance, waiting period or outcome rate.
- NHS: heart attack, 31 March 2026 — Emergency recognition and local-service boundary; self-medication instructions excluded.
- NHS: beta blockers, 4 September 2026 — Selected generic side effects, suitability and interaction review, not a bridge regimen.
- NHS: verapamil interactions, 13 March 2025 — Selected medicine/herbal safety context only.
- GSTT: coronary angiogram, March 2026 version4 — Selected catheter/contrast explanation and risks, no personal preparation or eligibility.
- ESC working group: original coronary-anatomy position statement, 2016, 13 pages — Selected coronary-flow mechanism; treatment-success and developmental efficacy claims excluded.
- ESC: actual current funding-model original — Current institutional routes only; not independent clearance of guidelines or trials.
- ESC: actual current offices original — Current headquarters, not a 2016/2020 research-funding assignment.
- Cleveland Clinic: original audited 2025/2024 accounts — Actual audited 2025/2024 provider accounts; no clinical-page or intervention-trial allocation.
- Cleveland Clinic: advertising policy — January 2020 commercial policy only; page receipts and compliance unclosed.
- Cleveland Clinic: editorial policy — Writing/review process only; individual financial interests not cleared.
- National NHS website content and funding policy, 2022 — Dated October 2022 national website policy; provider finances separate.
- Guy’s and St Thomas’ own 2025–2026 audited accounts — Actual audited 2025–26 provider accounts; no leaflet or source-trial allocation.
- NCCIH: using dietary supplements wisely, January 2019 — Dated January 2019 generic precautions; no condition-specific product benefit.
- NCCIH: original appropriations history — Historical table through FY2024, not current-year receipts.
- NCCIH: original Gift Fund authority — Separate gift authority and Bethesda contact, not named donor receipt.
- AHA: actual audited FY2024/2025 accounts, 31 pages — Dated society receipts/commercial interests only.
- AHA: actual FY2024/2025 pharmaceutical/device funding disclosure — Commercial route only; no percentage or maker ranking used.
- AHA: actual national-centre contact original — Current national-centre jurisdiction only.
- ACC: actual advertising/sponsorship policy — Commercial institutional routes only.
- ACC: actual 2025 financial overview index — Access/status limitation only, not a complete accounts analysis.
- ACC: actual current contact original — Current office/jurisdiction only.
Educational information reviewed 4 October 2026. This guide supports an informed clinical discussion; it does not diagnose an individual or provide a personal treatment regimen.
Have a question — or want us to cover something?
Ask about anything on this page, or request the next deep dive: an ingredient, a supplement, or a health concern. We use published research, evidence syntheses, and regulatory guidance, with clear source links.
One daily research roundup
Get the topics, key findings and links from our new articles in one email. At most one digest a day, only when there is something new.