Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Cardiovascular, Case Report
Cardiovascular, Commentary
Cardiovascular, Editorial
Cardiovascular, Guest Editorial
Cardiovascular, Images in Cardiology
Cardiovascular, Interventional Round
Cardiovascular, Original Article
Cardiovascular, Perspective Review
Cardiovascular, Preface
Cardiovascular, Review Article
Cardiovascular, Student’s Corner
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical Discussion
Clinical Rounds
CPC
Current Issue
Debate
Dedication
Editorial
Expert Comments
Expert's Opinion
Genetic Autopsy
Genetics Autopsy
Image in Cardiology
Images in Cardiology
Interventional Round
Interventional Rounds
Letter to the Editor
Media and news
Original Article
Practice in Medicine
Preface
Review Article
Scientific Paper
Short Communication
Student's Corner
Supplementary
Supplemetary
WINCARS Activities
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Cardiovascular, Case Report
Cardiovascular, Commentary
Cardiovascular, Editorial
Cardiovascular, Guest Editorial
Cardiovascular, Images in Cardiology
Cardiovascular, Interventional Round
Cardiovascular, Original Article
Cardiovascular, Perspective Review
Cardiovascular, Preface
Cardiovascular, Review Article
Cardiovascular, Student’s Corner
Case Report
Case Reports
Clinical Discussion
Clinical Rounds
CPC
Current Issue
Debate
Dedication
Editorial
Expert Comments
Expert's Opinion
Genetic Autopsy
Genetics Autopsy
Image in Cardiology
Images in Cardiology
Interventional Round
Interventional Rounds
Letter to the Editor
Media and news
Original Article
Practice in Medicine
Preface
Review Article
Scientific Paper
Short Communication
Student's Corner
Supplementary
Supplemetary
WINCARS Activities
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

Editorial
02 (
04
); 063-064
doi:
10.1055/s-0038-1620320

Outcomes of Females with Normal Coronaries on Coronary Angiogram

Department of Cardiology, CARE Hospitals, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
Address for correspondence Mira Govindarajan, Consultant Non-Invasive Cardiology Department of Cardiology, CARE Hospitals, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana India miragdoc@yahoo.co.in
Licence
This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd. and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher; therefore Scientific Scholar has no control over the quality or content of this article.

This issue addresses the dilemma of management in women with chest pain and normal coronaries. The protocol for these patients must incorporate probability of future coronary events1 and mortality there from.2 The economic burden to individual family and community as also the emotional impact must be borne in mind.

Angina in the absence of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD), sometimes referred to as cardiac syndrome X (CSX), is known to disproportionately affect women.3 More than 50% of women evaluated for angina have nonobstructive disease by cardiac catheterization.4

Two hypotheses have existed to explain CSX: the ischemic hypothesis—abnormal coronary microvascular function, and the nonischemic hypothesis describing altered pain perception and myocardial hypersensitivity. A prospective study using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI) in women presenting with acute mycoardial infarction (MI) without obstructive CAD at angiography demonstrated plaque disruption as a frequent finding.5

With regard to treatment strategies, β-blockers have been the mainstay along with other antianginals, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, statins, and lifestyle modifications. However, there is still a paucity of data to define an optimal algorithm for diagnosis and management more so with regard to women.6

In a population-based cohort study of 32,856 patients published in 1981, women with angiographically normal coronaries were more than four times more likely to be readmitted to hospital for acute coronary syndrome (ACS)/chest pain within 180 days compared with men. The observed sex difference suggested that traditional diagnostic methods may be inappropriate for women.7

The Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS) registry8 incorporated 25,000 patients undergoing coronary angiography for angina, of whom 39% of women had normal coronary arteries compared with 11% of men. Data from 375,886 patients referred for angiography due to stable angina in the American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) showed that the prevalence of nonobstructive disease was significantly higher in women (51%) than in men (32%).

Higher prevalence in women was again confirmed by the Women's Ischemic Syndrome Evaluation (WISE) study, as per which 62% of women referred for angiography had nonobstructive CAD.

Our conventional understanding of CAD presupposes that premenopausal women are less likely to suffer from CAD than their age-matched male counterparts.9 Though this may be true in a larger context, it becomes pertinent to review the study published by Proudfit et al in Circulation.10 This study followed up more than a 1,000 women younger than 50 years for more than 5 years and reported a survival rate of 96.9%. Causes of death were coronary ectasia and sudden cardiac death.

Seven of the 727 women who had less than 30% luminal narrowing went on to have coronary events whereas 6 of the 324 women who had 30 to 50% lesions went on to have coronary events. Overall, such cases represented 6.8% of patients referred for coronary angiography.

Thus the subset of patients presenting with chest pain and angiographically insignificant lesions namely with less than 50% luminal narrowing presents a challenging situation from the clinical perspective, and protocols for optimal follow-up are yet to be defined.

References

  1. , , . Acute ST elevation myocardial infarction with angiographically normal coronary arteries: causes and outcomes. Int J Cardiol. 2008;128(01):131-133.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , , , , . Braunwald's Heart Disease: A Textbook of Cardiovascular Medicine. (10th ed.). Saunders; .
    [Google Scholar]
  3. , , , , , , . Syndrome X in women is associated with oestrogen deficiency. Eur Heart J. 1995;16(05):610-614.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , . Angina in women without obstructive coronary artery disease. Curr Cardiol Rev. 2010;6(01):71-81.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. , , , et al . Mechanisms of myocardial infarction in women without angiographically obstructive coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2011;124(13):1414-1425.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. , , , et al . American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data Registry Investigators. Impact of ethnicity and gender differences on angiographic coronary artery disease prevalence and in-hospital mortality in the American College of Cardiology-National Cardiovascular Data RegistryCirculation. 2008;117(14):1787-1801.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. , , , , , . Angina with “normal” coronary arteries: sex differences in outcomes. Am Heart J. 2008;155(02):375-381.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. , , , , , . Comparison of 15-year survival for men and women after initial medical or surgical treatment for coronary artery disease: a CASS registry study. Coronary Artery Surgery StudyJ Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;25(05):1000-1009.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. , , , , , , . Prevalence of angina in women versus men: a systematic review and meta-analysis of international variations across 31 countries. Circulation. 2008;117(12):1526-1536.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. , , , , , . Prognosis of 1000 young women studied by coronary angiography. Circulation. 1981;64(06):1185-1190.
    [Google Scholar]

Fulltext Views
14

PDF downloads
0
View/Download PDF
Download Citations
BibTeX
RIS
Show Sections