Sex differences in the presentation and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a critical review of contemporary data and a look towards future directions.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Current Opinion in Critical Care Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-27 DOI:10.1097/MCC.0000000000001166
Emily Smith, Jacqueline E Tamis-Holland
{"title":"Sex differences in the presentation and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: a critical review of contemporary data and a look towards future directions.","authors":"Emily Smith, Jacqueline E Tamis-Holland","doi":"10.1097/MCC.0000000000001166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a devasting complicating of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), associated with significant mortality. Prior studies have reported sex differences in the presentation, management and outcomes of patients with AMI and CS. These differences are likely due to a variety of factors influencing therapeutic decision-making and impacting survival. This review highlights the more contemporary studies exploring differences in women and men with AMI-CS, providing a critical perspective towards understanding the factors that might lead to these differences and outlining potential opportunities to reduce disparities in treatment and improve survival for women with AMI-CS.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Recent reports demonstrate that women with AMI-CS are older than men and have more cardiovascular comorbidities. When examining an unselected population of patients with AMI-CS, women receive less aggressive treatment compared to men and have poorer outcomes. However, when examining a selected population of patients with AMI-CS treated with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) and/or admitted to centers that implement CS protocols to manage AMI-CS, these sex-based differences in outcomes are largely mitigated.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>Standardizing protocols for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with AMI-CS, with an emphasis on early revascularization and appropriate invasive therapies, can improve outcomes in women and narrow the gender gap.</p>","PeriodicalId":10851,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","volume":" ","pages":"344-353"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MCC.0000000000001166","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a devasting complicating of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), associated with significant mortality. Prior studies have reported sex differences in the presentation, management and outcomes of patients with AMI and CS. These differences are likely due to a variety of factors influencing therapeutic decision-making and impacting survival. This review highlights the more contemporary studies exploring differences in women and men with AMI-CS, providing a critical perspective towards understanding the factors that might lead to these differences and outlining potential opportunities to reduce disparities in treatment and improve survival for women with AMI-CS.

Recent findings: Recent reports demonstrate that women with AMI-CS are older than men and have more cardiovascular comorbidities. When examining an unselected population of patients with AMI-CS, women receive less aggressive treatment compared to men and have poorer outcomes. However, when examining a selected population of patients with AMI-CS treated with mechanical circulatory support (MCS) and/or admitted to centers that implement CS protocols to manage AMI-CS, these sex-based differences in outcomes are largely mitigated.

Summary: Standardizing protocols for the diagnosis and treatment of patients with AMI-CS, with an emphasis on early revascularization and appropriate invasive therapies, can improve outcomes in women and narrow the gender gap.

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
并发心源性休克的急性心肌梗死患者在表现和预后方面的性别差异:对当代数据的批判性回顾和对未来方向的展望。
综述目的:心源性休克(CS)是急性心肌梗死(AMI)的一种严重并发症,死亡率极高。先前的研究报告显示,急性心肌梗死和心源性休克患者在发病、管理和预后方面存在性别差异。这些差异可能是由于影响治疗决策和生存的各种因素造成的。本综述重点介绍了探讨女性和男性 AMI-CS 患者差异的最新研究,为了解可能导致这些差异的因素提供了重要视角,并概述了减少治疗差异和提高女性 AMI-CS 患者生存率的潜在机会:最近的报告显示,女性 AMI-CS 患者的年龄比男性大,且有更多的心血管并发症。在对未经选择的 AMI-CS 患者进行研究时,女性接受的积极治疗少于男性,且治疗效果较差。小结:规范 AMI-CS 患者的诊断和治疗方案,强调早期血管重建和适当的侵入性疗法,可以改善女性患者的预后,缩小性别差异。
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
Current Opinion in Critical Care
Current Opinion in Critical Care 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
172
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​​​Current Opinion in Critical Care delivers a broad-based perspective on the most recent and most exciting developments in critical care from across the world. Published bimonthly and featuring thirteen key topics – including the respiratory system, neuroscience, trauma and infectious diseases – the journal’s renowned team of guest editors ensure a balanced, expert assessment of the recently published literature in each respective field with insightful editorials and on-the-mark invited reviews.
期刊最新文献
Advances in critical care nephrology through artificial intelligence. Cerebral oximetry in high-risk surgical patients: where are we? Emergency airway management in the post anesthesia care unit. Fluid management in the septic peri-operative patient. Is tranexamic acid appropriate for all patients undergoing high-risk surgery?
×
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