The influence of patient sex on pulmonary embolism evaluation, treatment modality, and outcomes.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Joshua Newman,Elizabeth Bruno,Sorcha Allen,Jonathan Moore,Robert Zilinyi,Asma Khaliq,Fahad Alkhafan,Clara Vitarello,Robert Lookstein,Brent Keeling,C Michael Gibson,Kenneth Rosenfield,Eric A Secemsky,Rachel P Rosovsky,Amir Darki
{"title":"The influence of patient sex on pulmonary embolism evaluation, treatment modality, and outcomes.","authors":"Joshua Newman,Elizabeth Bruno,Sorcha Allen,Jonathan Moore,Robert Zilinyi,Asma Khaliq,Fahad Alkhafan,Clara Vitarello,Robert Lookstein,Brent Keeling,C Michael Gibson,Kenneth Rosenfield,Eric A Secemsky,Rachel P Rosovsky,Amir Darki","doi":"10.1177/1358863x241281872","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nPulmonary embolism (PE) is the third-leading cause of cardiovascular mortality, accounting for 100,000 deaths per year in the United States. Although sex-based disparities have previously been described in this population, it is unclear if these differences have persisted with the expansion of PE evaluation and treatment approaches. The purpose of this study is to investigate sex-based differences in the evaluation, management, and outcomes of patients with acute PE.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nWe performed a retrospective analysis of patients enrolled in the national Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) Consortium database between October 2015 and October 2022. We evaluated patient demographics, clinical characteristics, diagnostic imaging performed, treatment at several phases of care (pre-PERT, PERT recommendations, and post-PERT), and clinical outcomes.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nA total of 5722 patients with acute PE (2838 [49.6%] women) from 35 centers were included. There were no differences in PE risk category between male and female patients. Women were less likely to undergo echocardiography (76.9% vs 73.8%) and more likely to receive no anticoagulation prior to PERT evaluation (35.5% vs 32.9%). PERT teams were more likely to recommend catheter-based interventions for men (26.6% vs 23.1%), and men were more likely to undergo these procedures (21.9% vs 19.3%). In a multivariable analysis, female sex was a predictor of in-hospital mortality (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.21).\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS\r\nIn this analysis, we identified sex-based differences in the evaluation and management of patients presenting with acute PE. Subsequently, women presenting with acute PE were at higher risk of in-hospital mortality.","PeriodicalId":23604,"journal":{"name":"Vascular Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vascular Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1358863x241281872","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BACKGROUND Pulmonary embolism (PE) is the third-leading cause of cardiovascular mortality, accounting for 100,000 deaths per year in the United States. Although sex-based disparities have previously been described in this population, it is unclear if these differences have persisted with the expansion of PE evaluation and treatment approaches. The purpose of this study is to investigate sex-based differences in the evaluation, management, and outcomes of patients with acute PE. METHODS We performed a retrospective analysis of patients enrolled in the national Pulmonary Embolism Response Team (PERT) Consortium database between October 2015 and October 2022. We evaluated patient demographics, clinical characteristics, diagnostic imaging performed, treatment at several phases of care (pre-PERT, PERT recommendations, and post-PERT), and clinical outcomes. RESULTS A total of 5722 patients with acute PE (2838 [49.6%] women) from 35 centers were included. There were no differences in PE risk category between male and female patients. Women were less likely to undergo echocardiography (76.9% vs 73.8%) and more likely to receive no anticoagulation prior to PERT evaluation (35.5% vs 32.9%). PERT teams were more likely to recommend catheter-based interventions for men (26.6% vs 23.1%), and men were more likely to undergo these procedures (21.9% vs 19.3%). In a multivariable analysis, female sex was a predictor of in-hospital mortality (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.21). CONCLUSIONS In this analysis, we identified sex-based differences in the evaluation and management of patients presenting with acute PE. Subsequently, women presenting with acute PE were at higher risk of in-hospital mortality.
患者性别对肺栓塞评估、治疗方式和结果的影响。
背景肺栓塞(PE)是导致心血管疾病死亡的第三大原因,在美国每年造成 10 万人死亡。虽然以前曾描述过这一人群中存在性别差异,但目前还不清楚随着 PE 评估和治疗方法的扩展,这些差异是否仍然存在。本研究的目的是调查急性 PE 患者在评估、管理和预后方面的性别差异。方法我们对 2015 年 10 月至 2022 年 10 月期间加入全国肺栓塞反应小组(PERT)联盟数据库的患者进行了回顾性分析。我们评估了患者的人口统计学特征、临床特征、所进行的诊断成像、几个护理阶段(PERT 前、PERT 建议和 PERT 后)的治疗以及临床结果。结果共纳入了来自 35 个中心的 5722 名急性 PE 患者(2838 名 [49.6%] 女性)。男性和女性患者的 PE 风险类别没有差异。女性接受超声心动图检查的可能性较低(76.9% 对 73.8%),在进行 PERT 评估前不接受抗凝治疗的可能性较高(35.5% 对 32.9%)。PERT 团队更有可能建议男性接受导管介入治疗(26.6% 对 23.1%),男性也更有可能接受这些治疗(21.9% 对 19.3%)。在一项多变量分析中,女性是院内死亡率的预测因素(OR 1.53,95% CI 1.06 至 2.21)。因此,女性急性 PE 患者的院内死亡风险更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Vascular Medicine
Vascular Medicine 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.70%
发文量
158
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The premier, ISI-ranked journal of vascular medicine. Integrates the latest research in vascular biology with advancements for the practice of vascular medicine and vascular surgery. It features original research and reviews on vascular biology, epidemiology, diagnosis, medical treatment and interventions for vascular disease. A member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信