What does this research mean for the field?

Women undergoing complex PCI with MCS support experience higher procedural risk and worse early outcomes compared to men, but adjusted 1-year MACE rates are comparable between sexes. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.CONFIRMATORY. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.CHALLENGES_CONSENSUS.

What question did this study set out to answer?

This research aims to analyze sex differences in outcomes related to complex percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) using mechanical circulatory support (MCS).

February 27, 2026Open Access

Sex Differences in Outcomes of Complex Percutaneous Coronary Interventions Assisted With Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices

Key Points

This research aims to analyze sex differences in outcomes related to complex percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) using mechanical circulatory support (MCS).
Analyzed outcomes of women and men undergoing complex PCI with MCS support.
Compared 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) rates between sexes.
Measured procedural risks, bleeding, and mortality outcomes.
Women experienced higher procedural risks and worse early outcomes compared to men.
Adjusted 1-year MACE rates were similar between men and women.
Significant differences were noted in bleeding and mortality outcomes.

Abstract

Women undergoing complex PCI with MCS support experienced higher procedural risk and worse early outcomes, yet adjusted 1-year MACE rates were comparable to men. The marked absolute differences in bleeding and mortality highlight the need for sex-specific approaches to patient selection, procedural planning, and post-PCI management in this high-risk population.

Read Full Paperexternally

Bookmark

View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kalaba et al. (Mon,) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69a1344fed1d949a99abe0c0 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacadv.2026.102622

Bookmark

View Full Paper