Literature DB >> 33388397

Sex differences in distribution, management and outcomes of combined ischemic-bleeding risk following acute coronary syndrome.

Mohamed O Mohamed1, Muhammad Rashid2, Adam Timmis3, Sarah Clarke4, Claire Lawson5, Erin D Michos6, Chun Shing Kwok2, Mark De Belder7, Marco Valgimigli8, Mamas A Mamas1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Risk factors for further bleeding and ischemic events after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) often overlap. Little is known about sex-based differences in the management and outcomes of ACS patients according to their combined bleeding-ischemic risk.
METHODS: All ACS hospitalizations in the United Kingdom (2010-2017) were retrospectively analyzed, stratified by sex and bleeding-ischemic risk combination (using CRUSADE and GRACE scores). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to examine association between risk-groups and 1) receipt of guideline-recommended management and 2) in-hospital outcomes.
RESULTS: Of 584,360 patients, a third of males (32.3%) and females (32.6%) were in the dual high-risk group (High CRUSADE- High GRACE). In comparison to the dual low-risk group (Low CRUSADE-Low GRACE), the dual high-risk patients of both sexes were 59-83% less likely to receive inpatient revascularisation (PCI or CABG) and 50% less likely to receive dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) on discharge, with a significant increase in odds of MACE (~8 to 9-fold), all-cause and cardiac mortality (25 to 35-fold), and bleeding (78-91%). The greatest difference in management and clinical outcomes between sexes was found in the dual-high risk group where females were less likely to receive guideline-recommended therapy (revascularisation and DAPT), compared to males, and were more likely to experience MACE, all-cause and cardiac mortality.
CONCLUSION: ACS patients with dual high-risk for bleeding and recurrent ischemia, especially females, are less likely to receive guideline-recommended therapy and experience significantly worse outcomes. Novel strategies are needed to effectively manage this highly prevalent, complex patient group and address the under-treatment of females.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CRUSADE; GRACE; Management; Outcomes; Risk scores; Sex

Year:  2020        PMID: 33388397     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.12.063

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiol        ISSN: 0167-5273            Impact factor:   4.164


  3 in total

1.  Impact of the admitting ward on care quality and outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: insights from a national registry.

Authors:  Saadiq M Moledina; Ahmad Shoaib; Louise Y Sun; Phyo K Myint; Rafail A Kotronias; Benoy N Shah; Chris P Gale; Hude Quan; Rodrigo Bagur; Mamas A Mamas
Journal:  Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes       Date:  2022-09-05

2.  Hospital frailty risk score predicts adverse events in spine surgery.

Authors:  Loreto C Pulido; Matthias Meyer; Jan Reinhard; Tobias Kappenschneider; Joachim Grifka; Markus Weber
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2022-04-18       Impact factor: 2.721

3.  Sex differences following percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass surgery for acute myocardial infarction.

Authors:  Donna Shu-Han Lin; Yu-Sheng Lin; Jen-Kuang Lee; Hsien-Li Kao
Journal:  Biol Sex Differ       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 5.027

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.