RESUMEN
Background: The literature review shows that female patients are more frequently underdiagnosed or suffer from delayed diagnosis. Recognition of sex-related differences is crucial for implementing strategies to improve cardiovascular outcomes. We aimed to assess sex-related disparities in the frequency of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided procedures in patients who underwent angiography and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: We have derived the data from the national registry of percutaneous coronary interventions and retrospectively analyzed the data of more than 1.4 million angiography and/or PCI procedures [1,454,121 patients (62.54% men and 37.46% women)] between 2014 and 2022. The logistic regression analysis was conducted to explore whether female sex was associated with FFR utilization. Results: The FFR was performed in 61,305 (4.22%) patients and more frequently in men than women (4.15% vs. 3.45%, p < 0.001). FFR was more frequently assessed in females with acute coronary syndrome than males (27.75% vs. 26.08%, p < 0.001); however, women with chronic coronary syndrome had FFR performed less often than men (72.25% vs. 73.92%, p < 0.001). Females with FFR-guided procedures were older than men (69.07 (±8.87) vs. 65.45 (±9.38) p < 0.001); however. less often had a history of myocardial infarction (MI) (24.79% vs. 36.73%, p < 0.001), CABG (1.62% vs. 2.55%, p < 0.005) or PCI (36.6% vs. 24.79%, p < 0.001) compared to men. Crude comparison has shown that male sex was associated with a higher frequency of FFR assessment (OR = 1.2152-1.2361, p < 0.005). Conclusions: Despite a substantial rise in FFR utilization, adoption in women remains lower than in men. Female sex was found to be an independent negative predictor of FFR use.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Aortic valve stenosis (AS) generates a chronic pressure overload that induces left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH). The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of the electrocardiographic criteria for LVH in patients with clinically significant AS and to evaluate the relationship between the ECG criteria for LVH and echocardiographic parameters. METHODS: The clinical data of 95 patients with moderate to severe AS were retrospectively analyzed. Eight ECG criteria for LVH were used and compared to the results of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). RESULTS: In 59% of patients, at least one of the ECG criteria for LVH was found. These patients had a greater LVMI (142.1 ± 35.6 vs. 124.1 ± 22.5 g/m2 , p = 0.01) and peak aortic jet velocity (4.2 ± 0.8 vs. 3.8 ± 0.9 m/s, p = 0.01) along with smaller aortic valve area (0.72 ± 0.28 vs. 0.86 ± 0.22 cm2 , p = 0.02) compared to patients with a negative ECG for LVH. The ECG parameters had a low sensitivity (6%-36.9%) with a specificity of up to 100%. The Cornell Voltage criteria had the best sensitivity with a specificity of 63.6% and the highest correlation with the LVMI (r = 0.38, p < 0.001). All of the ECG parameters correlated positively with the peak aortic jet velocity as well as with the mean aortic gradient. CONCLUSION: The electrocardiographic criteria for LVH in patients with moderate or severe AS have a poor sensitivity in identifying LVH confirmed by TTE. The values of the selected ECG criteria for LVH correlate weakly with both the TTE indices of LVH and the markers of AS severity.