Inequalities for women diagnosed with distal arch and descending thoracic aortic aneurysms: results from the Effective Treatments for Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms (ETTAA) cohort study.

IF 8.6 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY British Journal of Surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-02 DOI:10.1093/bjs/znae185
Anna L Pouncey, Dhvni Patel, Carol Freeman, Priya Sastry, Colin Bicknell, Stephen R Large, Linda D Sharples
{"title":"Inequalities for women diagnosed with distal arch and descending thoracic aortic aneurysms: results from the Effective Treatments for Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms (ETTAA) cohort study.","authors":"Anna L Pouncey, Dhvni Patel, Carol Freeman, Priya Sastry, Colin Bicknell, Stephen R Large, Linda D Sharples","doi":"10.1093/bjs/znae185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Women with thoracic aortic aneurysms within the arch or descending thoracic aorta have poorer survival than men. Sex differences in relative thoracic aortic aneurysm size may account for some of the discrepancy. The aim of this study was to explore whether basing clinical management on aneurysm size index (maximum aneurysm diameter/body surface area) rather than aneurysm size can restore equality of survival by sex.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Effective Treatments for Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms (ETTAA; ISRCTN04044627) study was a prospective, observational cohort study. Adults referred to National Health Service hospitals in England with new/existing arch or descending thoracic aorta aneurysms greater than or equal to 4 cm in diameter were followed from March 2014 to March 2022. Baseline characteristics and survival to intervention and overall were compared for men and women. Survival models were used to assess the association between all-cause survival and sex, with and without adjustment for aneurysm diameter or aneurysm size index.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 886 thoracic aortic aneurysm patients were recruited: 321 (36.2%) women and 565 (63.8%) men. The mean(s.d.) aneurysm diameter was the same for women and men (5.7(1.1) versus 5.7(1.2) cm respectively; P = 0.751), but the mean(s.d.) aneurysm size index was greater for women than for men (3.32(0.80) versus 2.83(0.63) respectively; P < 0.001). Women had significantly worse survival without intervention: 110 (34.3%) women and 135 (23.9%) men (log rank test, P < 0.001). All-cause mortality remained greater for women after adjustment for diameter (HR 1.65 (95% c.i. 1.35 to 2.02); P < 0.001), but was attenuated after adjustment for aneurysm size index (HR 1.11 (95% c.i. 0.89 to 1.38); P = 0.359). Similar results were found for all follow-up, with or without intervention, and findings were consistent for descending thoracic aorta aneurysms alone.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Guidelines for referral to specialist services should consider including aneurysm size index rather than diameter to reduce inequity due to patient sex.</p>","PeriodicalId":136,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Surgery","volume":"111 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11293951/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znae185","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Women with thoracic aortic aneurysms within the arch or descending thoracic aorta have poorer survival than men. Sex differences in relative thoracic aortic aneurysm size may account for some of the discrepancy. The aim of this study was to explore whether basing clinical management on aneurysm size index (maximum aneurysm diameter/body surface area) rather than aneurysm size can restore equality of survival by sex.

Methods: The Effective Treatments for Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms (ETTAA; ISRCTN04044627) study was a prospective, observational cohort study. Adults referred to National Health Service hospitals in England with new/existing arch or descending thoracic aorta aneurysms greater than or equal to 4 cm in diameter were followed from March 2014 to March 2022. Baseline characteristics and survival to intervention and overall were compared for men and women. Survival models were used to assess the association between all-cause survival and sex, with and without adjustment for aneurysm diameter or aneurysm size index.

Results: A total of 886 thoracic aortic aneurysm patients were recruited: 321 (36.2%) women and 565 (63.8%) men. The mean(s.d.) aneurysm diameter was the same for women and men (5.7(1.1) versus 5.7(1.2) cm respectively; P = 0.751), but the mean(s.d.) aneurysm size index was greater for women than for men (3.32(0.80) versus 2.83(0.63) respectively; P < 0.001). Women had significantly worse survival without intervention: 110 (34.3%) women and 135 (23.9%) men (log rank test, P < 0.001). All-cause mortality remained greater for women after adjustment for diameter (HR 1.65 (95% c.i. 1.35 to 2.02); P < 0.001), but was attenuated after adjustment for aneurysm size index (HR 1.11 (95% c.i. 0.89 to 1.38); P = 0.359). Similar results were found for all follow-up, with or without intervention, and findings were consistent for descending thoracic aorta aneurysms alone.

Conclusion: Guidelines for referral to specialist services should consider including aneurysm size index rather than diameter to reduce inequity due to patient sex.

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
被诊断出患有远端拱形和降主动脉瘤的女性的不平等:胸主动脉瘤有效治疗(ETTAA)队列研究的结果。
背景:患有胸主动脉弓或降主动脉内胸主动脉瘤的女性存活率低于男性。胸主动脉瘤相对大小的性别差异可能是造成这种差异的部分原因。本研究旨在探讨根据动脉瘤大小指数(动脉瘤最大直径/体表面积)而非动脉瘤大小进行临床管理是否能恢复性别生存率平等:胸主动脉瘤的有效治疗(ETTAA;ISRCTN04044627)研究是一项前瞻性观察队列研究。2014年3月至2022年3月期间,对转诊至英格兰国民健康服务医院、患有直径大于或等于4厘米的新发/存在的弓形或降主动脉瘤的成人进行了随访。比较了男性和女性的基线特征、干预后存活率和总存活率。在对动脉瘤直径或动脉瘤大小指数进行调整或未进行调整的情况下,使用生存模型评估全因生存率与性别之间的关系:结果:共招募了 886 名胸主动脉瘤患者:其中女性 321 人(36.2%),男性 565 人(63.8%)。女性和男性动脉瘤的平均(s.d.)直径相同(分别为 5.7(1.1) cm 对 5.7(1.2) cm;P = 0.751),但女性动脉瘤的平均(s.d.)大小指数大于男性(分别为 3.32(0.80) cm 对 2.83(0.63) cm;P < 0.001)。女性在未接受干预的情况下存活率明显较低:女性为 110 人(34.3%),男性为 135 人(23.9%)(对数秩检验,P < 0.001)。根据直径进行调整后,女性的全因死亡率仍然更高(HR 1.65(95% 置信区间:1.35 至 2.02);P < 0.001),但根据动脉瘤大小指数进行调整后,女性的全因死亡率有所降低(HR 1.11(95% 置信区间:0.89 至 1.38);P = 0.359)。无论是否进行干预,所有随访结果相似,仅降主动脉瘤的随访结果一致:结论:专科服务转诊指南应考虑纳入动脉瘤大小指数而非直径,以减少因患者性别造成的不平等。
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
12.70
自引率
7.30%
发文量
1102
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Surgery (BJS), incorporating the European Journal of Surgery, stands as Europe's leading peer-reviewed surgical journal. It serves as an invaluable platform for presenting high-quality clinical and laboratory-based research across a wide range of surgical topics. In addition to providing a comprehensive coverage of traditional surgical practices, BJS also showcases emerging areas in the field, such as minimally invasive therapy and interventional radiology. While the journal appeals to general surgeons, it also holds relevance for specialty surgeons and professionals working in closely related fields. By presenting cutting-edge research and advancements, BJS aims to revolutionize the way surgical knowledge is shared and contribute to the ongoing progress of the surgical community.
期刊最新文献
Assessing diversity among consultant paediatric surgeons in the UK: open science, education, and academic achievement. Surgeon factors and their association with operating room turnover time. Chest wall perforator flaps are safe and can decrease mastectomy rates in breast cancer surgery: multicentre cohort study. Infrapyloric and gastroepiploic lymph node metastasis in right transverse colon cancer (InCLART study): multicentre, prospective, observational study. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy versus adjuvant chemotherapy in anorectal melanoma.
×
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