Diferenças de gênero nos resultados da intervenção coronariana percutânea primária em pacientes com infarto do miocárdio com elevação de ST

Roberto Ramos Barbosa , Valmin Ramos da Silva , Renato Giestas Serpa , Felipe Bortot Cesar , Vinicius Fraga Mauro , Denis Moulin dos Reis Bayerl , Walkimar Ururay Gloria Veloso , Roberto de Almeida Cesar , Pedro Abilio Ribeiro Reseck
{"title":"Diferenças de gênero nos resultados da intervenção coronariana percutânea primária em pacientes com infarto do miocárdio com elevação de ST","authors":"Roberto Ramos Barbosa ,&nbsp;Valmin Ramos da Silva ,&nbsp;Renato Giestas Serpa ,&nbsp;Felipe Bortot Cesar ,&nbsp;Vinicius Fraga Mauro ,&nbsp;Denis Moulin dos Reis Bayerl ,&nbsp;Walkimar Ururay Gloria Veloso ,&nbsp;Roberto de Almeida Cesar ,&nbsp;Pedro Abilio Ribeiro Reseck","doi":"10.1016/j.rbci.2015.12.006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Higher mortality is reported among women with ST‐elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and angiographic profiles, as well as outcomes of patients submitted to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), according to gender.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Retrospective study that included patients with STEMI undergoing pPCI between March 2012 and May 2013 at a regional referral center, followed from admission until hospital discharge or death.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>208 patients underwent pPCI, of whom 51 (24.5%) were women and 157 (75.5%) men. A significant difference was observed for age (65.5 ± 14.0 vs. 58.8 ± 11.0 years; <em>p =</em> 0.001), diabetes (43.1% vs. 24.8%; <em>p =</em> 0.02), Killip‐Kimball class III/IV (7.0% vs. 17.6%; <em>p =</em> 0.02), pain‐to‐door time (181 ± 154<!--> <!-->minutes vs. 125 ± 103<!--> <!-->minutes; <em>p =</em> 0.004), and door‐to‐balloon time (181 ± 87 vs. 133<!--> <!-->minutes ± 67<!--> <!-->minutes; <em>p =</em> 0.001). The success of the procedure was similar (92.1% vs. 91.1%; <em>p =</em> 0.22). In‐hospital mortality was higher for females (23.5% vs. 8.9%; <em>p =</em> 0.006). Multivariate analysis identified age ≥ 70 years (odds ratio ‐ OR = 2.75; 95% confidence interval ‐ 95% CI: 1.81–3.64; <em>p =</em> 0.029) and Killip‐Kimball class III/IV (OR = 2.45; 95% CI: 1.49–4.02; <em>p =</em> 0.002) as independent predictors of mortality.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Women with STEMI had a more severe clinical profile and longer pain‐to‐door and door‐to‐balloon times than men. Females had higher in‐hospital mortality after pPCI, but the female gender was not identified as an independent predictor of death.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":101093,"journal":{"name":"Revista Brasileira de Cardiologia Invasiva","volume":"23 2","pages":"Pages 96-101"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.rbci.2015.12.006","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Brasileira de Cardiologia Invasiva","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0104184315000387","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Background

Higher mortality is reported among women with ST‐elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and angiographic profiles, as well as outcomes of patients submitted to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), according to gender.

Methods

Retrospective study that included patients with STEMI undergoing pPCI between March 2012 and May 2013 at a regional referral center, followed from admission until hospital discharge or death.

Results

208 patients underwent pPCI, of whom 51 (24.5%) were women and 157 (75.5%) men. A significant difference was observed for age (65.5 ± 14.0 vs. 58.8 ± 11.0 years; p = 0.001), diabetes (43.1% vs. 24.8%; p = 0.02), Killip‐Kimball class III/IV (7.0% vs. 17.6%; p = 0.02), pain‐to‐door time (181 ± 154 minutes vs. 125 ± 103 minutes; p = 0.004), and door‐to‐balloon time (181 ± 87 vs. 133 minutes ± 67 minutes; p = 0.001). The success of the procedure was similar (92.1% vs. 91.1%; p = 0.22). In‐hospital mortality was higher for females (23.5% vs. 8.9%; p = 0.006). Multivariate analysis identified age ≥ 70 years (odds ratio ‐ OR = 2.75; 95% confidence interval ‐ 95% CI: 1.81–3.64; p = 0.029) and Killip‐Kimball class III/IV (OR = 2.45; 95% CI: 1.49–4.02; p = 0.002) as independent predictors of mortality.

Conclusions

Women with STEMI had a more severe clinical profile and longer pain‐to‐door and door‐to‐balloon times than men. Females had higher in‐hospital mortality after pPCI, but the female gender was not identified as an independent predictor of death.

经皮冠状动脉介入治疗心肌梗死伴ST升高患者结果的性别差异
背景:据报道,女性ST -抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)的死亡率较高。本研究旨在评估经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(pPCI)患者的临床和血管造影特征,以及根据性别的结果。方法回顾性研究纳入2012年3月至2013年5月在地区转诊中心接受pPCI治疗的STEMI患者,随访时间为入院至出院或死亡。结果208例患者行pPCI,其中女性51例(24.5%),男性157例(75.5%)。年龄差异有统计学意义(65.5±14.0∶58.8±11.0岁;P = 0.001),糖尿病(43.1% vs. 24.8%;p = 0.02), Killip‐Kimball III/IV级(7.0% vs. 17.6%;P = 0.02),疼痛到门的时间(181±154分钟vs 125±103分钟;P = 0.004),门到球囊的时间(181±87 vs 133±67分钟;P = 0.001)。手术成功率相似(92.1% vs. 91.1%;P = 0.22)。女性住院死亡率更高(23.5% vs 8.9%;P = 0.006)。多因素分析确定年龄≥70岁(优势比‐OR = 2.75;95%置信区间‐95% CI: 1.81-3.64;p = 0.029)和Killip‐Kimball III/IV级(OR = 2.45;95% ci: 1.49-4.02;P = 0.002)作为死亡率的独立预测因子。结论:女性STEMI患者的临床表现比男性更严重,从疼痛到门和从门到球囊的时间更长。pPCI后女性住院死亡率较高,但女性性别未被确定为死亡的独立预测因子。
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