Sudden cardiac death: recognising hidden risk among women versus men

H. Tan, C. Remme
{"title":"Sudden cardiac death: recognising hidden risk among women versus men","authors":"H. Tan, C. Remme","doi":"10.1136/heartjnl-2021-320776","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite improvements in prevention and therapy of coronary artery disease, the burden of sudden cardiac death (SCD) remains high, as SCD accounts for up to 20% of all natural deaths in Europe. Hence, there is a continued need for improved strategies to identify those individuals at risk of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) and SCD. Sudden death is defined as a nontraumatic, unexpected fatal event occurring within 1 hour of onset of symptoms in an apparently healthy subject (or, if unwitnessed, when the victim was in good health 24 hours before the event). According to the 2015 European Society of Cardiology guidelines, the term SCD is used either when a potentially fatal cardiac condition was known to be present during life, autopsy revealed a cardiac or vascular anomaly as the probable cause of the event, or no obvious extracardiac causes were identified by postmortem examination. Based on various prospective studies, the incidence of SCD is estimated to be around 50–150 per 100 000 personyears, but variability between cohorts exists due to differences in available (clinical) information and criteria used. To accommodate these variations, the SCD definition may be refined by subcategorising it into definite, probable or possible SCD depending on a number of criteria, as indicated in figure 1. Hence, accurate assessment of SCD incidence not only relies on the availability of autopsy findings and clinical information, but also on the presence of an immediate witness to the SCD event or a ‘remote witness’ (who witnessed the victim <24 hours before the SCD was discovered). Significant differences exist between men and women in SCD incidence, underlying cardiac pathology, as well as rhythm disturbances and symptoms preceding SCD, indicating a potential need for sexdependent risk stratification and prevention strategies. Skjelbred et al investigated this issue in more detail by examining incidence rates, clinical characteristics, comorbidities and autopsy findings between male and female SCD victims across all ages in a nationwide Danish study. The results show that, overall, SCD was especially more frequent in men in young and middleaged age groups, whereas the difference between sex was less apparent in older age groups. Using information from the Danish National Patient Registry, which contains International Classification of Diseases codes from all inpatient and outpatient hospital admissions, emergency departments and consults, the authors established that male SCD victims more often had a history of cardiovascular disease and diabetes compared with female SCD victims. Another strength of the study lies within the requirement of death certificates (containing information on circumstances preceding SCD and medical history) and a forensic autopsy in cases with an unknown or uncertain manner of death. Interestingly, the distribution between definite, probable and possible SCD (defined as indicated in figure 1) was significantly different between men and women. To meet the criteria for definite SCD, victims were either autopsied or had a documented ventricular arrhythmia preceding death. A significantly greater number of men were autopsied or externally examined by a public health officer, which is explained by the fact that male SCD victims were younger and therefore more likely to be thoroughly examined postmortem. Clearly, biological differences exist between men and women which significantly impact on cardiac pathologies and consequently arrhythmia mechanism and SCD risk. Overall, the majority of men suffering SCD are found to have underlying coronary artery disease; in contrast, autopsies on female SCD victims more often identify underlying nonischaemic heart disease, including dilated cardiomyopathy and valvular heart disease. Moreover, most men present with ventricular fibrillation in the setting of SCA, while women are more likely to have pulseless electrical activity or asystole as the first rhythm during resuscitation. Similarly, Skjelbred et al reported a lower rate of coronary artery disease but a higher frequency of hypertrophy, aortic dissection and myocarditis in women as compared with men (as identified on autopsy). In addition to biological differences, social and environmental factors contribute to sex differences in SCD occurrence and outcome. The definition of probable versus possible SCD is highly dependent on the delay between the actual occurrence of the arrest and the moment when the victim was found. Overall, SCA is less commonly witnessed in women than in men, because women suffer SCA less often in public places and they live alone more often, having outlived their spouses as a result of their longer life expectancy. Indeed, Skjelbred and colleagues reported that female SCD victims died more often at home compared with men, while male SCD victims died at the hospital more often than women. Nevertheless, even if SCA is witnessed in women, they are less likely to be resuscitated by bystanders than men and the delay to resuscitation is longer than in men. This may be partly explained by the fact that women more frequently experience ‘nonclassical’ symptoms of, for example, coronary artery disease. As a result, neither she nor her immediate surroundings (family, friends and colleagues, but also her general practitioner) may be aware of the fact that she may have an underlying cardiac condition, and hence an SCA may not be immediately recognised in the event of a collapse. Even if resuscitation attempts are made, women have lower survival rates, partly due to the fact that they present less often with a shockable initial rhythm, either due to differences in underlying aetiology (see above) or consequent to a longer delay before resuscitation was initiated. Hence, increasing awareness of these issues among healthcare professionals, patients and the general public","PeriodicalId":9311,"journal":{"name":"British Heart Journal","volume":"108 1","pages":"992 - 993"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Heart Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2021-320776","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Despite improvements in prevention and therapy of coronary artery disease, the burden of sudden cardiac death (SCD) remains high, as SCD accounts for up to 20% of all natural deaths in Europe. Hence, there is a continued need for improved strategies to identify those individuals at risk of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) and SCD. Sudden death is defined as a nontraumatic, unexpected fatal event occurring within 1 hour of onset of symptoms in an apparently healthy subject (or, if unwitnessed, when the victim was in good health 24 hours before the event). According to the 2015 European Society of Cardiology guidelines, the term SCD is used either when a potentially fatal cardiac condition was known to be present during life, autopsy revealed a cardiac or vascular anomaly as the probable cause of the event, or no obvious extracardiac causes were identified by postmortem examination. Based on various prospective studies, the incidence of SCD is estimated to be around 50–150 per 100 000 personyears, but variability between cohorts exists due to differences in available (clinical) information and criteria used. To accommodate these variations, the SCD definition may be refined by subcategorising it into definite, probable or possible SCD depending on a number of criteria, as indicated in figure 1. Hence, accurate assessment of SCD incidence not only relies on the availability of autopsy findings and clinical information, but also on the presence of an immediate witness to the SCD event or a ‘remote witness’ (who witnessed the victim <24 hours before the SCD was discovered). Significant differences exist between men and women in SCD incidence, underlying cardiac pathology, as well as rhythm disturbances and symptoms preceding SCD, indicating a potential need for sexdependent risk stratification and prevention strategies. Skjelbred et al investigated this issue in more detail by examining incidence rates, clinical characteristics, comorbidities and autopsy findings between male and female SCD victims across all ages in a nationwide Danish study. The results show that, overall, SCD was especially more frequent in men in young and middleaged age groups, whereas the difference between sex was less apparent in older age groups. Using information from the Danish National Patient Registry, which contains International Classification of Diseases codes from all inpatient and outpatient hospital admissions, emergency departments and consults, the authors established that male SCD victims more often had a history of cardiovascular disease and diabetes compared with female SCD victims. Another strength of the study lies within the requirement of death certificates (containing information on circumstances preceding SCD and medical history) and a forensic autopsy in cases with an unknown or uncertain manner of death. Interestingly, the distribution between definite, probable and possible SCD (defined as indicated in figure 1) was significantly different between men and women. To meet the criteria for definite SCD, victims were either autopsied or had a documented ventricular arrhythmia preceding death. A significantly greater number of men were autopsied or externally examined by a public health officer, which is explained by the fact that male SCD victims were younger and therefore more likely to be thoroughly examined postmortem. Clearly, biological differences exist between men and women which significantly impact on cardiac pathologies and consequently arrhythmia mechanism and SCD risk. Overall, the majority of men suffering SCD are found to have underlying coronary artery disease; in contrast, autopsies on female SCD victims more often identify underlying nonischaemic heart disease, including dilated cardiomyopathy and valvular heart disease. Moreover, most men present with ventricular fibrillation in the setting of SCA, while women are more likely to have pulseless electrical activity or asystole as the first rhythm during resuscitation. Similarly, Skjelbred et al reported a lower rate of coronary artery disease but a higher frequency of hypertrophy, aortic dissection and myocarditis in women as compared with men (as identified on autopsy). In addition to biological differences, social and environmental factors contribute to sex differences in SCD occurrence and outcome. The definition of probable versus possible SCD is highly dependent on the delay between the actual occurrence of the arrest and the moment when the victim was found. Overall, SCA is less commonly witnessed in women than in men, because women suffer SCA less often in public places and they live alone more often, having outlived their spouses as a result of their longer life expectancy. Indeed, Skjelbred and colleagues reported that female SCD victims died more often at home compared with men, while male SCD victims died at the hospital more often than women. Nevertheless, even if SCA is witnessed in women, they are less likely to be resuscitated by bystanders than men and the delay to resuscitation is longer than in men. This may be partly explained by the fact that women more frequently experience ‘nonclassical’ symptoms of, for example, coronary artery disease. As a result, neither she nor her immediate surroundings (family, friends and colleagues, but also her general practitioner) may be aware of the fact that she may have an underlying cardiac condition, and hence an SCA may not be immediately recognised in the event of a collapse. Even if resuscitation attempts are made, women have lower survival rates, partly due to the fact that they present less often with a shockable initial rhythm, either due to differences in underlying aetiology (see above) or consequent to a longer delay before resuscitation was initiated. Hence, increasing awareness of these issues among healthcare professionals, patients and the general public
心源性猝死:识别女性与男性之间的潜在风险
尽管冠状动脉疾病的预防和治疗有所改善,但心脏性猝死(SCD)的负担仍然很高,因为SCD占欧洲所有自然死亡的20%。因此,仍然需要改进策略来识别那些有心脏骤停(SCA)和SCD风险的个体。猝死是指在明显健康的受试者出现症状后1小时内发生的非创伤性、意外的致命事件(或者,如果未被发现,当受害者在事件发生前24小时健康状况良好时)。根据2015年欧洲心脏病学会指南,当已知生命中存在潜在致命的心脏病,尸检显示心脏或血管异常是事件的可能原因,或者尸检未发现明显的心外原因时,使用SCD一词。根据各种前瞻性研究,SCD的发病率估计约为每10万人年50-150例,但由于可用(临床)信息和所用标准的差异,队列之间存在差异。为了适应这些变化,可以根据一些标准将SCD定义细分为明确的、可能的或可能的SCD,如图1所示。因此,对SCD发病率的准确评估不仅取决于尸检结果和临床信息的可用性,还取决于SCD事件的直接目击者或“远程目击者”(在发现SCD前24小时内目睹受害者)的存在。男性和女性在SCD发病率、潜在的心脏病理学、节律紊乱和SCD前症状方面存在显著差异,这表明可能需要进行性别依赖性风险分层和预防策略。Skjelbred等人在丹麦的一项全国性研究中,通过检查所有年龄段的男性和女性SCD患者的发病率、临床特征、合并症和尸检结果,对这一问题进行了更详细的调查。结果表明,总体而言,SCD在年轻和中年男性中尤其常见,而性别差异在老年组中不太明显。根据丹麦国家患者登记处的信息,作者确定,与女性SCD患者相比,男性SCD患者更经常有心血管疾病和糖尿病病史。该登记处包含所有住院和门诊医院、急诊科和咨询机构的国际疾病分类代码。该研究的另一个优势在于要求提供死亡证明(包含SCD之前的情况和病史信息),以及在死亡方式未知或不确定的情况下进行法医尸检。有趣的是,明确的、可能的和可能的SCD(如图1所示)之间的分布在男性和女性之间存在显著差异。为了达到确定SCD的标准,受害者要么进行尸检,要么在死亡前有记录的室性心律失常。公共卫生官员对更多的男性进行了尸检或外部检查,这可以解释为男性SCD受害者更年轻,因此更有可能在死后进行彻底检查。显然,男性和女性之间存在生物学差异,这对心脏病理以及心律失常机制和SCD风险有显著影响。总体而言,大多数患有SCD的男性被发现患有潜在的冠状动脉疾病;相比之下,对女性SCD患者的尸检更能确定潜在的非传染性心脏病,包括扩张型心肌病和瓣膜性心脏病。此外,大多数男性在SCA的情况下出现心室颤动,而女性更有可能在复苏过程中出现无脉冲电活动或心搏停止作为第一节律。同样,Skjelbred等人报告称,与男性相比,女性的冠状动脉疾病发生率较低,但肥大、主动脉夹层和心肌炎的发生率较高(尸检证实)。除了生物学差异外,社会和环境因素也会导致SCD发生和结果的性别差异。可能SCD与可能SCD的定义在很大程度上取决于实际逮捕发生与发现受害者之间的延迟。总的来说,女性患SCA的几率低于男性,因为女性在公共场所患SCA的频率较低,而且由于预期寿命较长,她们更经常独自生活,比配偶长寿。事实上,Skjelbred及其同事报告称,与男性相比,女性SCD受害者在家中死亡的频率更高,而男性SCD患者在医院死亡的频率高于女性。 然而,即使在女性身上看到SCA,她们也比男性更不可能被旁观者复苏,复苏的延迟也比男性更长。这在一定程度上可以解释为女性更频繁地出现“非经典”症状,例如冠状动脉疾病。因此,她和她的周围环境(家人、朋友和同事,还有她的全科医生)可能都不知道她可能有潜在的心脏病,因此在发生崩溃时,SCA可能不会立即被识别出来。即使进行了复苏尝试,女性的存活率也较低,部分原因是她们出现令人震惊的初始节律的频率较低,这可能是由于潜在病因的差异(见上文),也可能是由于复苏开始前的延迟时间较长。因此,医疗专业人员、患者和公众对这些问题的认识不断提高
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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