Sex Difference in Patients With Ischemic Heart Failure Undergoing Surgical Revascularization

Sex Difference in Patients With Ischemic Heart Failure Undergoing Surgical Revascularization Background: Female sex is conventionally considered a risk factor for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and has been included as a poor prognostic factor in multiple cardiac operative risk evaluation scores. We aimed to investigate the association of sex and the long-term benefit of CABG in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction enrolled in the prospective STICH trial (Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure Study). Methods: The STICH trial randomized 1212 patients (148 [12%] women and 1064 [88%] men) with coronary artery disease and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% to CABG+medical therapy (MED) versus MED alone. Long-term (10-year) outcomes with each treatment were compared according to sex. Results: At baseline, women were older (63.4 versus 59.3 years; P=0.016) with higher body mass index (27.9 versus 26.7 kg/m2; P=0.001). Women had more coronary artery disease risk factors (diabetes mellitus, 55.4% versus 37.2%; hypertension, 70.9% versus 58.6%; hyperlipidemia, 70.3% versus 58.9%) except for smoking (13.5% versus 21.8%) and had lower rates of prior CABG (0% versus 3.4%; all P<0.05) than men. Moreover, women had higher New York Heart Association class (class III/IV, 66.2% versus 57.0%), lower 6-minute walk capacity (300 versus 350 m), and lower Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary scores (51 versus 63; all P<0.05). Over 10 years of follow-up, all-cause mortality (49.0% versus 65.8%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.52–0.86; P=0.002) and cardiovascular mortality (34.3% versus 52.3%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.48–0.89; P=0.006) were significantly lower in women compared with men. With randomization to CABG+MED versus MED treatment, there was no significant interaction between sex and treatment group in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or the composite of all-cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization (all P>0.05). In addition, surgical deaths were not statistically different (1.5% versus 5.1%; P=0.187) between sexes among patients randomized to CABG per protocol as initial treatment. Conclusions: Sex is not associated with the effect of CABG+MED versus MED on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, the composite of death or cardiovascular hospitalization, or surgical deaths in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. Thus, sex should not influence treatment decisions about CABG in these patients. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00023595. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Circulation Wolters Kluwer Health

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wolters_kluwer/sex-difference-in-patients-with-ischemic-heart-failure-undergoing-IiJll8ePqN
Publisher
Wolters Kluwer
Copyright
© 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.
ISSN
0009-7322
eISSN
1524-4539
D.O.I.
10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.117.030526
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Background: Female sex is conventionally considered a risk factor for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and has been included as a poor prognostic factor in multiple cardiac operative risk evaluation scores. We aimed to investigate the association of sex and the long-term benefit of CABG in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction enrolled in the prospective STICH trial (Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure Study). Methods: The STICH trial randomized 1212 patients (148 [12%] women and 1064 [88%] men) with coronary artery disease and left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% to CABG+medical therapy (MED) versus MED alone. Long-term (10-year) outcomes with each treatment were compared according to sex. Results: At baseline, women were older (63.4 versus 59.3 years; P=0.016) with higher body mass index (27.9 versus 26.7 kg/m2; P=0.001). Women had more coronary artery disease risk factors (diabetes mellitus, 55.4% versus 37.2%; hypertension, 70.9% versus 58.6%; hyperlipidemia, 70.3% versus 58.9%) except for smoking (13.5% versus 21.8%) and had lower rates of prior CABG (0% versus 3.4%; all P<0.05) than men. Moreover, women had higher New York Heart Association class (class III/IV, 66.2% versus 57.0%), lower 6-minute walk capacity (300 versus 350 m), and lower Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary scores (51 versus 63; all P<0.05). Over 10 years of follow-up, all-cause mortality (49.0% versus 65.8%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.52–0.86; P=0.002) and cardiovascular mortality (34.3% versus 52.3%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.48–0.89; P=0.006) were significantly lower in women compared with men. With randomization to CABG+MED versus MED treatment, there was no significant interaction between sex and treatment group in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or the composite of all-cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization (all P>0.05). In addition, surgical deaths were not statistically different (1.5% versus 5.1%; P=0.187) between sexes among patients randomized to CABG per protocol as initial treatment. Conclusions: Sex is not associated with the effect of CABG+MED versus MED on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, the composite of death or cardiovascular hospitalization, or surgical deaths in patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction. Thus, sex should not influence treatment decisions about CABG in these patients. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00023595.

Journal

CirculationWolters Kluwer Health

Published: Feb 20, 2018

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off