Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27250115›Full record

Observational studyBMC cardiovascular disorders2016

Use of diagnostic coronary angiography in women and men presenting with acute myocardial infarction: a matched cohort study.

Louise Hougesen Bjerking, Kim Wadt Hansen, Mette Madsen, Jan Skov Jensen, Jan Kyst Madsen, Rikke Sørensen, Søren Galatius

Abstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Assessing and Modifying Coronary Artery Disease Risk in Women.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2017
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Louise Hougesen BjerkingDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Gentofte, Kildegårdsvej 28, 2900, Hellerup, Denmark. louise_bjerking@hotmail.com.
Kim Wadt HansenDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mette MadsenDepartment of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Jan Skov JensenDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Gentofte, Kildegårdsvej 28, 2900, Hellerup, Denmark.
Jan Kyst MadsenEmergency Department, Holbaek Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Holbaek, Denmark.
Rikke SørensenDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Gentofte, Kildegårdsvej 28, 2900, Hellerup, Denmark.
Søren GalatiusDepartment of Cardiology, University Hospital Bispebjerg, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBased on evident sex-related differences in the invasive management of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI), we sought to identify predictors of diagnostic coronary angiography (DCA) and to investigate reasons for opting out an invasive strategy in women and men.

methodsThe study was designed as a matched cohort study. We randomly selected 250 female cases from a source population of 4000 patients hospitalized with a first AMI in a geographically confined region of Denmark from January 2010 to November 2011. Each case was matched to a male control on age and availability of cardiac invasive facilities at the index hospital. We systematically reviewed medical records for risk factors, comorbid conditions, clinical presentation, and receipt of DCA. Clinical justifications, as stated by the treating physician, were noted for the subset of patients who did not receive a DCA.

resultsOverall, 187 women and 198 men received DCA within 60 days (75 % vs. 79 %, hazard ratio: 0.82 [0.67-1.00], p = 0.047).In the subset of patients who did not receive a DCA (n = 114), clinical justifications for opting out an invasive strategy was not documented for 21 patients (18.4 %). Type 2 myocardial infarction was noted in 11 patients (women versus men; 14.5 % vs. 3.8 %, p = 0.06) and identified as a potential confounder of the sex-DCA relationship. Receipt of DCA was predicted by traditional risk factors for ischaemic heart disease (family history of cardiovascular disease, hypercholesterolemia, and smoking) and clinical presentation (chest pain, ST-segment elevations). Although prevalent in both women and men, the presence of relative contraindications did not prohibit the use of DCA.

conclusionIn this matched cohort of patients with a first AMI, women and men had different clinical presentations despite similar age. However, no differences in the distribution of relative contraindications for DCA were found between the sexes. Type 2 MI posed a potentiel confounder for the sex-related differences in the use of DCA. Importantly,clinical justification for opting out an invasive strategy was not documented in almost one fifth of patients not receiving a DCA.

Indexed as

Coronary AngiographyHealthcare DisparitiesHealth Status DisparitiesPractice Patterns, Physicians'AgedAged, 80 and overComorbidityCoronary Artery DiseaseDenmarkFemaleHospitalizationHumansLife StyleMaleMedical RecordsMiddle AgedAcute myocardial infarctionCardiac catheterizationCoronary angiographyGender

Identifiers

PMID27250115
PMCPMC4888313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.