Comprehensive framework of factors accounting for worse aortic aneurysm outcomes in females: A scoping review

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Seminars in Vascular Surgery Pub Date : 2023-10-29 DOI:10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2023.10.007
Simon De Freitas , Garietta Falls , Tahlia Weis , Kirran Bakhshi , Lindsey M. Korepta , Carlos F. Bechara , Young Erben , Shipra Arya , Javairiah Fatima
{"title":"Comprehensive framework of factors accounting for worse aortic aneurysm outcomes in females: A scoping review","authors":"Simon De Freitas ,&nbsp;Garietta Falls ,&nbsp;Tahlia Weis ,&nbsp;Kirran Bakhshi ,&nbsp;Lindsey M. Korepta ,&nbsp;Carlos F. Bechara ,&nbsp;Young Erben ,&nbsp;Shipra Arya ,&nbsp;Javairiah Fatima","doi":"10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2023.10.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Sex-based outcome studies have consistently documented worse results for females undergoing care for abdominal aortic aneurysms<span><span>. This review explores the underlying factors that account for worse outcomes in the females sex. A scoping review of studies reporting sex-based disparities<span> on abdominal aortic aneurysms was performed. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for </span></span>Systematic reviews<span> and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. Factors that account for worse outcomes in the females sex were identified, grouped into themes, and analyzed. Key findings of each study are reported and a comprehensive framework of these factors is presented. A total of 35 studies were identified as critical in highlighting sex-based disparities in care of patients with aortic aneurysms. We identified the following 10 interrelated themes in the chain of aneurysm care that account for differential outcomes in females: natural history, risk factors, pathobiology, biomechanics, screening, morphology, device design and adherence to instructions for use, technique, trial enrollment, and social determinants. Factors accounting for worse outcomes in the care of females with aortic aneurysms were identified and described. Some factors are immediately actionable, such as screening criteria, whereas device design improvement will require further research and development. This comprehensive framework of factors affecting care of aneurysms in females should serve as a blueprint to develop education, outreach, and future research efforts to improve outcomes in females.</span></span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":51153,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Vascular Surgery","volume":"36 4","pages":"Pages 508-516"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in Vascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895796723000777","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sex-based outcome studies have consistently documented worse results for females undergoing care for abdominal aortic aneurysms. This review explores the underlying factors that account for worse outcomes in the females sex. A scoping review of studies reporting sex-based disparities on abdominal aortic aneurysms was performed. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews. Factors that account for worse outcomes in the females sex were identified, grouped into themes, and analyzed. Key findings of each study are reported and a comprehensive framework of these factors is presented. A total of 35 studies were identified as critical in highlighting sex-based disparities in care of patients with aortic aneurysms. We identified the following 10 interrelated themes in the chain of aneurysm care that account for differential outcomes in females: natural history, risk factors, pathobiology, biomechanics, screening, morphology, device design and adherence to instructions for use, technique, trial enrollment, and social determinants. Factors accounting for worse outcomes in the care of females with aortic aneurysms were identified and described. Some factors are immediately actionable, such as screening criteria, whereas device design improvement will require further research and development. This comprehensive framework of factors affecting care of aneurysms in females should serve as a blueprint to develop education, outreach, and future research efforts to improve outcomes in females.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
考虑女性主动脉瘤预后恶化因素的综合框架:范围综述
基于性别的结果研究一致证明,接受腹主动脉瘤治疗的女性结果更差。本综述探讨了导致女性预后较差的潜在因素。对报告腹主动脉瘤性别差异的研究进行了范围综述。该评价按照系统评价和荟萃分析扩展范围评价的首选报告项目(PRISMA-ScR)进行。研究人员确定了导致女性结果较差的因素,并将其归类为主题进行分析。报告了每项研究的主要发现,并提出了这些因素的综合框架。共有35项研究被确定为强调主动脉瘤患者护理中基于性别的差异的关键。我们在动脉瘤护理链中确定了10个相互关联的主题,这些主题解释了女性的不同结果:自然史、危险因素、病理生物学、生物力学、筛查、形态学、设备设计和使用说明书(IFU)的依从性、技术、试验登记和社会决定因素。确定并描述了导致女性主动脉瘤患者预后较差的因素。有些因素可以立即采取行动,例如筛选标准,而设备设计的改进则需要进一步的研究和开发。这一影响女性动脉瘤护理因素的综合框架应作为发展教育、推广和未来研究工作的蓝图,以改善女性的预后。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.00%
发文量
54
审稿时长
50 days
期刊介绍: Each issue of Seminars in Vascular Surgery examines the latest thinking on a particular clinical problem and features new diagnostic and operative techniques. The journal allows practitioners to expand their capabilities and to keep pace with the most rapidly evolving areas of surgery.
期刊最新文献
Introduction Choice of dialysis access: Catheter, peritoneal, or hemodialysis Effects of dialysis on peripheral arterial disease Management of dialysis access in the post-transplantation patient Management of carotid disease in the end-stage renal disease patient
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1