Marlies M Kok1, Liefke C van der Heijden1, Hanim Sen1, Peter W Danse2, Marije M Löwik1, Rutger L Anthonio3, J Hans W Louwerenburg1, Frits H A F de Man1, Gerard C M Linssen4, Maarten J IJzerman5, Carine J M Doggen5, Angela H E M Maas6, Roxana Mehran7, Clemens von Birgelen8. 1. Department of Cardiology, Thoraxcentrum Twente, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands. 2. Department of Cardiology, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, the Netherlands. 3. Department of Cardiology, Scheper Hospital, Emmen, the Netherlands. 4. Department of Cardiology, Ziekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo and Hengelo, the Netherlands. 5. Health Technology and Services Research, MIRA, Institute for Biomedical Technology and Technical Medicine, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands. 6. Chair of Cardiology for Women, Department of Cardiology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands. 7. The Zena and Michael A. Wiener Cardiovascular Institute, Mount Sinai Heart, Mount Sinai Medical Center, New York, New York. 8. Department of Cardiology, Thoraxcentrum Twente, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands; Health Technology and Services Research, MIRA, Institute for Biomedical Technology and Technical Medicine, University of Twente, Enschede, the Netherlands. Electronic address: c.vonbirgelen@mst.nl.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess sex differences in chest pain after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with newer generation drug-eluting stents (DES). BACKGROUND: Sex-based data on chest pain after PCI with DES are scarce. METHODS: The authors performed a patient-level pooled analysis of the TWENTE and DUTCH PEERS randomized trials, in which patients were treated with newer generation permanent polymer-coated DES. At 1 and 2 years, clinical follow-up was available in 99.8% and patient-reported chest pain data in 94.1% and 93.6%, respectively. RESULTS: Among all 3,202 patients, the 871 (27.2%) women were older (67.5 ± 10.2 years vs. 62.8 ± 10.6 years; p < 0.001) and had more cardiovascular risk factors: diabetes (24.2% vs. 17.8%; p < 0.001), hypertension (63.6% vs. 51.6%; p < 0.001), and positive family history (54.5% vs. 50.1%; p = 0.03). At 1- and 2-year follow-up, women reported more clinically relevant chest pain (16.3% vs. 10.5%; p < 0.001, and 17.2% vs. 11.1%; p < 0.001, respectively). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that female sex independently predicted clinically relevant chest pain at 1- and 2-year follow-up both during daily activities and at minimum physical exertion/at rest (1 year adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2 to 2.4; p = 0.002; and adjusted OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.3 to 2.5; p < 0.001; 2-year adjusted OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.3 to 2.6; p < 0.001; and adjusted OR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.3 to 2.3; p = 0.001). Nevertheless, the 2-year rates of death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, stent thrombosis, and various composite clinical endpoints were similar for both sexes. CONCLUSIONS: Although the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events was low and similar for both sexes, women showed a statistically significantly higher prevalence of clinically relevant chest pain, which might be largely related to mechanisms other than epicardial coronary obstruction.
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess sex differences in chest pain after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with newer generation drug-eluting stents (DES). BACKGROUND: Sex-based data on chest pain after PCI with DES are scarce. METHODS: The authors performed a patient-level pooled analysis of the TWENTE and DUTCH PEERS randomized trials, in which patients were treated with newer generation permanent polymer-coated DES. At 1 and 2 years, clinical follow-up was available in 99.8% and patient-reported chest pain data in 94.1% and 93.6%, respectively. RESULTS: Among all 3,202 patients, the 871 (27.2%) women were older (67.5 ± 10.2 years vs. 62.8 ± 10.6 years; p < 0.001) and had more cardiovascular risk factors: diabetes (24.2% vs. 17.8%; p < 0.001), hypertension (63.6% vs. 51.6%; p < 0.001), and positive family history (54.5% vs. 50.1%; p = 0.03). At 1- and 2-year follow-up, women reported more clinically relevant chest pain (16.3% vs. 10.5%; p < 0.001, and 17.2% vs. 11.1%; p < 0.001, respectively). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that female sex independently predicted clinically relevant chest pain at 1- and 2-year follow-up both during daily activities and at minimum physical exertion/at rest (1 year adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2 to 2.4; p = 0.002; and adjusted OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.3 to 2.5; p < 0.001; 2-year adjusted OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.3 to 2.6; p < 0.001; and adjusted OR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.3 to 2.3; p = 0.001). Nevertheless, the 2-year rates of death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, stent thrombosis, and various composite clinical endpoints were similar for both sexes. CONCLUSIONS: Although the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events was low and similar for both sexes, women showed a statistically significantly higher prevalence of clinically relevant chest pain, which might be largely related to mechanisms other than epicardial coronary obstruction.
Authors: Marlies M Kok; Marieke G M Weernink; Clemens von Birgelen; Anneloes Fens; Liefke C van der Heijden; Janine A van Til Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2017-05-04 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Constantin von Zur Mühlen; Simon Reiss; Axel J Krafft; Lisa Besch; Marius Menza; Manfred Zehender; Timo Heidt; Alexander Maier; Thomas Pfannebecker; Andreas Zirlik; Jochen Reinöhl; Peter Stachon; Ingo Hilgendorf; Dennis Wolf; Philipp Diehl; Tobias Wengenmayer; Ingo Ahrens; Christoph Bode; Michael Bock Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-01-25 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Monica Parry; Abida Dhukai; Hance Clarke; Ann Kristin Bjørnnes; Joseph A Cafazzo; Lynn Cooper; Paula Harvey; Joel Katz; Chitra Lalloo; Marit Leegaard; France Légaré; Mike Lovas; Judith McFetridge-Durdle; Michael McGillion; Colleen Norris; Laura Parente; Rose Patterson; Louise Pilote; Leah Pink; Jennifer Price; Jennifer Stinson; Akib Uddin; J Charles Victor; Judy Watt-Watson; Carol Auld; Christine Faubert; Deborah Park; Marianne Park; Beatrice Rickard; Vincenza Spiteri DeBonis Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-03-09 Impact factor: 2.692