Colleen K McIlvennan1, JoAnn Lindenfeld2, David P Kao3. 1. Division of Cardiology, School of Medicine, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado, USA. Electronic address: colleen.mcilvennan@ucdenver.edu. 2. Division of Cardiology, School of Medicine, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, USA. 3. Division of Cardiology, School of Medicine, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is a widely available management strategy. No studies have described sex differences in both extracorporeal and durable MCS. We analyzed sex-related differences of in-hospital outcomes for extracorporeal and durable MCS using administrative hospital data. METHODS: In total, 134.5 million hospital records between 1994 and 2012 were screened for placement of MCS using procedure codes of the International Classification of Diseases-9, Clinical Modification. Major adverse events (MAEs) were defined as death, major bleeding, stroke, device infection or mechanical complication. Participation in the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) registry was determined on an annual basis using quarterly reports of the INTERMACS. Associations between characteristics and outcomes were determined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Sex was reported in 3,523 of 4,337 patients undergoing MCS placement from 45 INTERMACS sites (n = 1,383) and 246 non-INTERMACS sites (n = 2,954). Twenty-two percent were female. Baseline characteristics were significantly different with women being slightly younger (33.5% vs 27.4% age <50 years, p < 0.001; mean 55.7 ± 17.3 vs 56.1 ± 14.6 years) with fewer comorbidities. Women had higher rates of in-hospital mortality (52.3% vs 40.8%, p < 0.001) and MAEs (64.8% vs 52.5%, p < 0.001). Women had an 89% higher likelihood of MAEs when corrected for multivariate predictors (p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality decreased over time for both men and women (10% relative risk reduction/year, p < 0.001), but mortality in women was higher than in men throughout the study period. CONCLUSION: There are significant sex differences in characteristics and outcomes of patients receiving MCS. Women had higher in-hospital mortality and were at increased risk of MAEs, which could not be explained by age or comorbid conditions. Further research on the causes of these disproportionate outcomes is needed.
BACKGROUND: Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is a widely available management strategy. No studies have described sex differences in both extracorporeal and durable MCS. We analyzed sex-related differences of in-hospital outcomes for extracorporeal and durable MCS using administrative hospital data. METHODS: In total, 134.5 million hospital records between 1994 and 2012 were screened for placement of MCS using procedure codes of the International Classification of Diseases-9, Clinical Modification. Major adverse events (MAEs) were defined as death, major bleeding, stroke, device infection or mechanical complication. Participation in the Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) registry was determined on an annual basis using quarterly reports of the INTERMACS. Associations between characteristics and outcomes were determined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Sex was reported in 3,523 of 4,337 patients undergoing MCS placement from 45 INTERMACS sites (n = 1,383) and 246 non-INTERMACS sites (n = 2,954). Twenty-two percent were female. Baseline characteristics were significantly different with women being slightly younger (33.5% vs 27.4% age <50 years, p < 0.001; mean 55.7 ± 17.3 vs 56.1 ± 14.6 years) with fewer comorbidities. Women had higher rates of in-hospital mortality (52.3% vs 40.8%, p < 0.001) and MAEs (64.8% vs 52.5%, p < 0.001). Women had an 89% higher likelihood of MAEs when corrected for multivariate predictors (p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality decreased over time for both men and women (10% relative risk reduction/year, p < 0.001), but mortality in women was higher than in men throughout the study period. CONCLUSION: There are significant sex differences in characteristics and outcomes of patients receiving MCS. Women had higher in-hospital mortality and were at increased risk of MAEs, which could not be explained by age or comorbid conditions. Further research on the causes of these disproportionate outcomes is needed.
Authors: Keith D Aaronson; Mark S Slaughter; Leslie W Miller; Edwin C McGee; William G Cotts; Michael A Acker; Mariell L Jessup; Igor D Gregoric; Pranav Loyalka; O H Frazier; Valluvan Jeevanandam; Allen S Anderson; Robert L Kormos; Jeffrey J Teuteberg; Wayne C Levy; David C Naftel; Richard M Bittman; Francis D Pagani; David R Hathaway; Steven W Boyce Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-05-22 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Eileen M Hsich; Maria V Grau-Sepulveda; Adrian F Hernandez; Eric D Peterson; Lee H Schwamm; Deepak L Bhatt; Gregg C Fonarow Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Emma J Birks; Edwin C McGee; Keith D Aaronson; Steven Boyce; William G Cotts; Samer S Najjar; Francis D Pagani; David R Hathaway; Kevin Najarian; Mary V Jacoski; Mark S Slaughter Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2014-12-29 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: Andrew J Boyle; Ulrich P Jorde; Benjamin Sun; Soon J Park; Carmelo A Milano; O Howard Frazier; Kartik S Sundareswaran; David J Farrar; Stuart D Russell Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-12-11 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Francis D Pagani; Leslie W Miller; Stuart D Russell; Keith D Aaronson; Ranjit John; Andrew J Boyle; John V Conte; Roberta C Bogaev; Thomas E MacGillivray; Yoshifumi Naka; Donna Mancini; H Todd Massey; Leway Chen; Charles T Klodell; Juan M Aranda; Nader Moazami; Gregory A Ewald; David J Farrar; O Howard Frazier Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2009-07-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Mark S Slaughter; Joseph G Rogers; Carmelo A Milano; Stuart D Russell; John V Conte; David Feldman; Benjamin Sun; Antone J Tatooles; Reynolds M Delgado; James W Long; Thomas C Wozniak; Waqas Ghumman; David J Farrar; O Howard Frazier Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-11-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rebecca S Steinberg; Aditi Nayak; Celena O'Connell; Sharon Burford; Ann Pekarek; Neile Chesnut; Robert T Cole; Divya Gupta; S Raja Laskar; Kunal Bhatt; Michael Burke; Tamer Attia; Andrew Smith; J David Vega; Alanna A Morris Journal: Clin Transplant Date: 2020-03-16 Impact factor: 2.863
Authors: David M Peng; Devin A Koehl; Ryan S Cantor; Kristen N McMillan; Aliessa P Barnes; Patrick I McConnell; Jessica Jordan; Nicholas D Andersen; James D St Louis; Katsuhide Maeda; James K Kirklin; Steven J Kindel Journal: J Heart Lung Transplant Date: 2018-10-31 Impact factor: 10.247
Authors: Nina Fluschnik; Felix Strangl; Christoph Kondziella; Alina Goßling; Peter Moritz Becher; Benedikt Schrage; Renate B Schnabel; Julia Bernadyn; Wiebke Bremer; Hanno Grahn; Alexander M Bernhardt; Hermann Reichenspurner; Meike Rybczynski; Stefan Blankenberg; Paulus Kirchhof; Christina Magnussen; Dorit Knappe Journal: ESC Heart Fail Date: 2021-09-06
Authors: Emily A Vail; Meng-Shiou Shieh; Penelope S Pekow; Hayley B Gershengorn; Allan J Walkey; Peter K Lindenauer; Hannah Wunsch Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2021-01
Authors: Larry A Allen; Colleen K McIlvennan; Jocelyn S Thompson; Shannon M Dunlay; Shane J LaRue; Eldrin F Lewis; Chetan B Patel; Laura Blue; Diane L Fairclough; Erin C Leister; Russell E Glasgow; Joseph C Cleveland; Clifford Phillips; Vicie Baldridge; Mary Norine Walsh; Daniel D Matlock Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2018-04-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Alina Zubarevich; Marcin Szczechowicz; Anja Osswald; Arian Arjomandi Rad; Robert Vardanyan; Michel Pompeu Bo Sá; Jef Van den Eynde; Bastian Schmack; Daniel Wendt; Achim Koch; Nikolaus Pizanis; Markus Kamler; Arjang Ruhparwar; Alexander Weymann; Konstantin Zhigalov Journal: Int J Artif Organs Date: 2021-03-30 Impact factor: 1.595