Key result
Female sex is linked to ~14% lower odds of diagnostic angiography for AMI.
Why the study?
Although sex disparities in the diagnostic evaluation and revascularization of patients with acute myocardial infarction are well documented, longitudinal trends in these disparities had not been evaluated.
Does female sex affect the use of diagnostic evaluation and revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Cohort (n=9,259,932)
Yes
Does female sex affect the use of diagnostic evaluation and revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction?
Despite some improvements over 15 years, women presenting with AMI continue to undergo diagnostic angiography and revascularization at significantly lower rates than men.
Persistent sex disparities in AMI care support clinician vigilance; leaves open whether targeted interventions can achieve equity.
Background Although sex disparities in the diagnostic evaluation and revascularization of patients with acute myocardial infarction are well documented, no study has evaluated longitudinal trends in these disparities. Methods and Results Using the National Inpatient Sample from 2005 to 2019, 9 259 932 patients with acute myocardial infarction were identified. We divided 15 years into five 3‐year periods. The primary objective was to evaluate sex‐based trends in the use of diagnostic angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention, and coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) among patients with non–ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction and ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) over 15 years. The secondary objective was to evaluate sex disparities in mortality, length of stay, and cost. For non–ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction, we saw a small reduction in sex disparity in the use of all diagnostic angiography in period 5 versus period 1 (4% versus 5.3%; P <0.01), no change in sex disparity in percutaneous coronary intervention use in period 5 versus period 1 (5.6% versus 5%; P =0.16), and a widening sex disparity in CABG in period 5 versus period 1 (5.4% versus 4.4%; P <0.01). However, we noted decreasing sex disparities in the use of diagnostic angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention, and CABG for ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction in mostly all periods compared with period 1 ( P <0.05, all comparisons), but differences still existed in period 5. Risk‐adjusted in‐hospital mortality was higher after CABG for non–ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction and after percutaneous coronary intervention and CABG for ST‐segment–elevation myocardial infarction in women than men. Conclusions Despite variable trends in sex disparities in diagnostic and revascularization procedures for acute myocardial infarction, disparities still exist.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ashraf et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Acute Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI and STEMI) (n=9,259,932). Female sex vs. Male sex was evaluated on Diagnostic angiography for NSTEMI (2017-2019 cohort) (AOR 0.86, 95% CI 0.84-0.87, p=<0.01). Despite some longitudinal improvements, female sex remained associated with significantly lower risk-adjusted odds of undergoing diagnostic angiography and revascularization for acute myocardial infarction.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: