Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2020 Sep 1;96(3):536-544.
doi: 10.1002/ccd.28509. Epub 2019 Oct 21.

Sex-related difference in the use of percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients undergoing complex high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: Insight from the cVAD registry

M Chadi Alraies  1 , Amir Kaki  2 , Marvin Kajy  1 , Nimrod Blank  1 , Reema Hasan  3 , Wah Wah Htun  4 , James J Glazier  1 , Mahir Elder  2 , William W O'Neill  5 , Cindy L Grines  6 , Theodore Schreiber  2
Affiliations
Free article
Comparative Study

Sex-related difference in the use of percutaneous left ventricular assist device in patients undergoing complex high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention: Insight from the cVAD registry

M Chadi Alraies et al. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. .
Free article

Abstract

Objective: To assess the in-hospital and short-term outcome differences between males and females who underwent high-risk PCI with mechanical circulatory support (MCS).

Background: Sex differences have been noted in several percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) series with females less likely to be referred for PCI due increased risk of adverse events. However, data on sex differences in utilization and outcomes of high-risk PCI with MCS is scarce.

Methods: Using the cVAD Registry, we identified 1,053 high-risk patients who underwent PCI with MCS using Impella 2.5 or Impella CP. Patients with cardiogenic shock were excluded. A total of 792 (75.21%) males and 261 (24.79%) females were included in the analysis with median follow-up of 81.5 days.

Results: Females were more likely to be African American, older (72.05 ± 11.66 vs. 68.87 ± 11.17, p < .001), have a higher prevalence of diabetes (59.30 vs. 49.04%, p = .005), renal insufficiency (35.41 vs. 27.39%, p = .018), and peripheral vascular disease (31.89 vs. 25.39%, p of .05). Women had a higher mean STS score (8.21 ± 8.21 vs. 5.04 ± 5.97, p < .001) and lower cardiac output on presentation (3.64 ± 1.30 vs. 4.63 ± 1.49, p < .001). Although women had more comorbidities, there was no difference in in-hospital mortality, stroke, MI or need for recurrent revascularization compared to males. Females were more likely to have multivessel revascularization than males. Ejection fraction improved in both males and females at the time of discharge (26.59 to 31.40% and 30.75 to 36.05%, respectively, p < .0001). However, females had higher rate of bleeding requiring transfusion compared with males (9.58 vs. 5.30%, p = .019).

Conclusion: Female patients undergoing high PCI were older and had more comorbidities but had similar outcomes compared to males.

Keywords: complex high-risk indicated patients; gender outcomes; mechanical circulatory support; percutaneous coronary intervention.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

REFERENCES

    1. Ratnaparkhi D, Mahajan T, Jadhav V. Heart disease prediction system using data mining technique. Int Res J Engine Technol (IRJET). 2015;2(08):2395-0056.
    1. Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI guideline for percutaneous coronary intervention. A report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(24):e44-e122.
    1. Becher T, Baumann S, Eder F, et al. Akin I. Comparison of peri and post-procedural complications in patients undergoing revascularisation of coronary artery multivessel disease by coronary artery bypass grafting or protected percutaneous coronary intervention with the Impella 2.5 device. Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care. 2017;8(4):360-368.
    1. Dixon SR, Henriques JP, Mauri L, et al. A prospective feasibility trial investigating the use of the Impella 2.5 system in patients undergoing high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (the PROTECT I trial): initial U.S. experience. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2(2):91-96.
    1. Sjauw KD, Konorza T, Erbel R, et al. Supported high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention with the Impella 2.5 device the Europella registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54(25):2430-2434.

MeSH terms