1
|
Segan L, Chieng D, Crowley R, William J, Sugumar H, Ling LH, Hawson J, Prabhu S, Voskoboinik A, Morton JB, Lee G, Sterns LD, Ginks M, Sanders P, Kalman JM, Kistler PM. Sex-specific outcomes after catheter ablation for persistent AF. Heart Rhythm 2024; 21:762-770. [PMID: 38336190 DOI: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.02.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/20/2023] [Revised: 02/01/2024] [Accepted: 02/05/2024] [Indexed: 02/12/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sex-specific outcomes after catheter ablation (CA) for atrial fibrillation (AF) have reported conflicting findings. OBJECTIVE We examined the impact of female sex on outcomes in patients with persistent AF (PsAF) from the Catheter Ablation for Persistent Atrial Fibrillation: A Multicentre Randomized Trial of Pulmonary Vein Isolation vs PVI with Posterior Left Atrial Wall Isolation (CAPLA) randomized trial. METHODS A total of 338 patients with PsAF were randomized to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) or PVI with posterior wall isolation (PWI). The primary outcome was arrhythmia recurrence at 12 months. Clinical and electroanatomical characteristics, arrhythmia recurrence, and quality of life were compared between women and men. RESULTS Seventy-nine women (23.4%; PVI 37; PVI + PWI 42) and 259 men (76.6%; PVI 131; PVI + PWI 128) underwent AF ablation. Women were older {median age 70.4 (interquartile range [IQR] 64.8-74.6) years vs 64.0 (IQR 56.7-69.7) years; P < .001} and had more advanced left atrial electroanatomical remodeling. At 12 months, arrhythmia-free survival was lower in women (44.3% vs 56.8% in men; hazard ratio 1.44; 95% confidence interval 1.02-2.04; log-rank, P = .036). PWI did not improve arrhythmia-free survival at 12 months (hazard ratio 1.02; 95% confidence interval 0.74-1.40; log-rank, P = .711). The median AF burden was 0% in both groups (women: IQR 0.0%-2.2% vs men: IQR 0.0%-2.8%; P = .804). Health care utilization was comparable between women (36.7%) and men (30.1%) (P = .241); however, women were more likely to undergo a repeat procedure (17.7% vs 6.9%; P = .007). Women reported more severe baseline anxiety (average Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS] anxiety score 7.5 ± 4.9 vs 6.3 ± 4.3 in men; P = .035) and AF-related symptoms (baseline Atrial Fibrillation Effect on Quality-of-Life Questionnaire [AFEQT] score 46.7 ± 20.7 vs 55.9 ± 23.0 in men; P = .002), with comparable improvements in psychological symptoms (change in HADS anxiety score -3.8 ± 4.6 vs -3.0 ± 4.5; P = .152 (change in HADS depression score -2.9 ± 5.0 vs -2.6 ± 4.0; P = .542) and greater improvement in AFEQT score compared with men at 12 months (change in AFEQT score +45.9 ± 23.1 vs +39.2 ± 24.8; P = .048). CONCLUSION Women undergoing CA for PsAF report more significant symptoms and poorer quality of life at baseline than men. Despite higher arrhythmia recurrence and repeat procedures in women, the AF burden was comparably low, resulting in significant improvements in quality of life and psychological well-being after CA in both sexes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Louise Segan
- The Baker Heart and Diabetes Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; The Alfred Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Monash University, Melbourne Victoria, Australia; Cabrini Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - David Chieng
- The Baker Heart and Diabetes Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; The Alfred Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Monash University, Melbourne Victoria, Australia; Cabrini Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Rose Crowley
- The Baker Heart and Diabetes Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; The Alfred Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Monash University, Melbourne Victoria, Australia; Cabrini Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Jeremy William
- The Baker Heart and Diabetes Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; The Alfred Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Monash University, Melbourne Victoria, Australia; Cabrini Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Hariharan Sugumar
- The Baker Heart and Diabetes Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; The Alfred Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Cabrini Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Liang-Han Ling
- The Baker Heart and Diabetes Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; The Alfred Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Joshua Hawson
- University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Royal Melbourne Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Sandeep Prabhu
- The Baker Heart and Diabetes Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; The Alfred Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Mulgrave Private Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Aleksandr Voskoboinik
- The Baker Heart and Diabetes Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; The Alfred Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Monash University, Melbourne Victoria, Australia; Cabrini Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Joseph B Morton
- University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Royal Melbourne Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Geoffrey Lee
- University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Royal Melbourne Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Laurence D Sterns
- Royal Jubilee Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada
| | - Matthew Ginks
- John Radcliffe Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Prashanthan Sanders
- Royal Adelaide Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Jonathan M Kalman
- University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Royal Melbourne Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Melbourne Private Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Peter M Kistler
- The Baker Heart and Diabetes Research Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; The Alfred Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Monash University, Melbourne Victoria, Australia; Cabrini Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; Melbourne Private Hospital, Department of Cardiology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sex and Gender Bias as a Mechanistic Determinant of Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes. Can J Cardiol 2022; 38:1865-1880. [PMID: 36116747 DOI: 10.1016/j.cjca.2022.09.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/29/2022] [Revised: 08/21/2022] [Accepted: 09/11/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Defined as a prejudice either for or against something, biases at the provider, patient, and societal level all contribute to differences in cardiovascular disease recognition and treatment, resulting in outcome disparities between sexes and genders. Provider bias in the under-recognition of female-predominant cardiovascular disease and risks might result in underscreened and undertreated patients. Furthermore, therapies for female-predominant phenotypes including nonobstructive coronary artery disease and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction are less well researched, contributing to undertreated female patients. Conversely, women are less likely to seek urgent medical attention, potentially related to societal bias to put others first, which contributes to diagnostic delays. Furthermore, women are less likely to have discussions around risk factors for coronary artery disease compared with men, partially because they are less likely to consider themselves at risk for heart disease. Provider bias in interpreting a greater number of presenting symptoms, some of which have been labelled as "atypical," can lead to mislabelling presentations as noncardiovascular. Furthermore, providers might avoid discussions around certain therapies including thrombolysis for stroke, and cardiac resynchronization therapy in heart failure, because it is incorrectly assumed that women are not interested in pursuing options deemed more invasive. To mitigate bias, organizations should aim to increase the visibility and involvement of women in research, health promotion, and clinical and leadership endeavours. More research needs to be done to identify effective interventions to mitigate sex and gender bias and the resultant cardiovascular outcome discrepancies.
Collapse
|