Key result
Female patients exhibit distinct anatomical differences and face increased risks of bleeding and certain procedural complications in percutaneous coronary and structural interventions compared to men.
Why the study?
As complex coronary and structural percutaneous interventions have expanded, the role of sex-based anatomic and outcome differences has been increasingly recognized, necessitating review of current evidence and future focus areas.
Recognizing sex-based anatomical and pathophysiological differences is crucial for optimizing outcomes and reducing complications in women undergoing coronary and structural interventions.
Supports sex-specific risk assessment in PCI and structural procedures; leaves open whether tailored strategies improve outcomes.
In the current state of interventional cardiology, the ability to offer advanced therapies to patients who historically were not surgical candidates has grown exponentially in the last few decades. As therapies have expanded in complex coronary and structural interventions, the nuances of treating certain populations have emerged. In particular, the role of sex-based anatomic and outcome differences has been increasingly recognized. As guidelines for cardiovascular prevention and treatment for certain conditions may vary by sex, therapeutic interventions in the structural and percutaneous coronary areas may also vary. In this review, we aim to discuss these differences, the current literature available on these topics, and areas of focus for the future.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mohadjer et al. (2020) conducted a review in Coronary and structural heart disease. Female sex vs. Male sex was evaluated. Female patients exhibit distinct anatomical differences and face increased risks of bleeding and certain procedural complications in percutaneous coronary and structural interventions compared to men.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: