Sex Differences in Management, Time to Intervention, and In-Hospital Mortality of Acute Myocardial Infarction and Non-Myocardial Infarction Related Cardiogenic Shock

Anushka Vishal Desai,Rohan Rani,Anum Sohail Minhas,Faisal Rahman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.10.11.24315358

2024-10-13

Abstract:Background Limited data are available on sex differences in the time to treatment of cardiogenic shock (CS) with and without acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods For this retrospective cohort study, we used nationally representative hospital survey data from the National Inpatient Sample (years 2016-2021) to assess sex differences in interventions, time to treatment (within versus after 24 hours of admission), and in-hospital mortality for AMI-CS and non-AMI-CS, adjusting for age, race, income, insurance, comorbidities, and prior cardiac interventions. Results We identified 1,052,360 weighted CS hospitalizations (60% non-AMI-CS; 40% AMI-CS). Women with CS had significantly lower rates of all interventions. For AMI-CS, women had a higher likelihood of in-hospital mortality after: revascularization (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.15 [95% CI 1.09-1.22]), mechanical circulatory support (MCS) (1.15 [1.08-1.22]), right heart catheterization (RHC) (1.10 [1.02-1.19]) (all p<0.001). Similar trends were found for the non-AMI-CS group. Women with AMI-CS were less likely to receive early (within 24 hours of admission) revascularization (0.93 [0.89-0.96]), MCS (0.76 [0.73-0.80]), or RHC (0.89 [0.84-0.95]) than men; women with non-AMI-CS were less likely to receive early revascularization (0.78 [0.73-0.84]), IABP (0.85 [0.78-0.94]), pLVAD (0.88 [0.77-0.99]) or RHC (0.83 [0.79-0.88]) than men (all p<0.001). For both types of CS, in-hospital mortality was not significantly different between men and women receiving early ECMO, pLVAD, or PCI. Conclusions Sex disparities in the frequency of treatment of CS persist on a national scale, with women being more likely to die following treatment and less likely to receive early treatment. However, when comparing patients who received early treatment, in-hospital mortality does not differ significantly when men and women are treated equally within 24 hours of admission. Early intervention if clinically indicated could mitigate sex-based differences in CS outcomes and should be made a priority in the management of CS.

Cardiovascular Medicine

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem this paper attempts to address is the gender differences in treatment intervention times and in-hospital mortality rates between men and women in cases of heart attack (acute myocardial infarction, AMI) and non-heart attack-related cardiogenic shock. The study uses a retrospective cohort study method, utilizing data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database in the United States, to analyze treatment interventions, intervention times (within 24 hours of admission vs. after 24 hours), and in-hospital mortality rates among cardiogenic shock patients from 2016 to 2021. The study adjusts for factors such as age, race, income, insurance, comorbidities, and previous cardiac interventions.

The main findings include:
1. Female patients received significantly fewer interventions compared to male patients.
2. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality rates between male and female patients when early treatment (within 24 hours of admission) was administered.
3. Early intervention can significantly reduce clinical outcome differences between genders.

The conclusion points out that despite significant gender differences, there is no noticeable difference in in-hospital mortality rates between male and female patients when treated equally within 24 hours of admission. Therefore, early intervention is crucial for narrowing the gender gap in the treatment of cardiogenic shock and should be a focus in the management of cardiogenic shock.