Why the study?
CAD severity varies among patients with severe AS, but whether this differentially influences prognosis remains unknown.
Does the absence of obstructive CAD improve cardiovascular outcomes differently in men versus women with severe aortic stenosis?
Cohort (n=7,505)
Yes
Does the absence of obstructive CAD improve cardiovascular outcomes differently in men versus women with severe aortic stenosis?
While obstructive CAD worsens long-term outcomes in men with severe aortic stenosis, this prognostic impact is absent in women, revealing a significant sex-based disparity in risk.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Absence of obstructive CAD may confer lower risk in men but not women with severe AS; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective confirmation.
BACKGROUND: There is heterogeneity in coronary artery disease (CAD) severity among individuals with severe aortic stenosis (AS), but whether this differentially influences prognosis is unknown. METHODS: Patients with severe AS in the PARTNER 1, 2, and 3 trials and registries (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) were stratified by obstructive CAD (coronary stenosis ≥50%, prior myocardial infarction, or revascularization) or no obstructive CAD (all stenoses <50%). Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models examined the association between CAD severity groups and clinical outcomes. The primary composite end point was death, heart failure hospitalization, or stroke at 5 years. Interaction between sex and CAD severity was evaluated. RESULTS: Among 7505 patients with severe AS, 2062 (27.5%) had no obstructive CAD and were more likely to be women (60.5%) with fewer CAD risk factors. After multivariable adjustment, the primary end point was significantly lower among patients with no obstructive CAD compared with those with obstructive CAD (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.92 [CI, 0.84–1.00]; P =0.04), irrespective of AS treatment. However, there were significant differences by sex ( P interaction =0.0002). Men with no obstructive CAD had a 16% lower event rate compared with men with obstructive CAD (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.84 [CI, 0.73–0.96]; P =0.01). In contrast, women with no obstructive CAD did not have a significantly lower rate of death, stroke, or heart failure hospitalization compared with women with obstructive CAD (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.95 [CI, 0.85–1.07]; P =0.41). Women with no obstructive CAD had a more advanced heart failure phenotype and higher event rates compared with men with no obstructive CAD. CONCLUSIONS: Obstructive CAD was associated with a higher risk of long-term adverse events after treatment for severe AS, but there was a significant sex disparity in clinical outcomes among men and women with no obstructive CAD. Further study is needed to optimize the evaluation and management of women with severe AS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brown et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in severe aortic stenosis (n=7,505). No obstructive CAD vs. Obstructive CAD was evaluated on death, heart failure hospitalization, or stroke at 5 years (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84-1.00, p=0.04).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: