Abstract
Aim
The optimal diagnostic test in the work-up of suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) may differ between men and women. The aim of this study was to compare sex-associated differences between using a diagnostic strategy including early coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and standard of care (SOC).
Methods
In total, 500 patients who presented with symptoms suggestive of ACS at the emergency department were randomised between a diagnostic strategy supplemented with early CCTA and SOC.
Results
Women were generally older than men (mean ± standard deviation 56 ± 10 vs 53 ± 10 years, p < 0.01) and were less often admitted to hospital (33% vs 44%, p = 0.02). Obstructive coronary artery disease on CCTA (> 50% luminal narrowing) was less frequently seen in women (14% vs 26%, p = 0.02), and ACS was diagnosed less often in women (5% vs 10%, p = 0.03). Women underwent less outpatient testing when early CCTA was used in the emergency department evaluation of suspected ACS (p = 0.008).
Conclusion
Women had a lower incidence of obstructive CAD on CCTA and were less often admitted to hospital than men. They were subjected to less outpatient testing when early CCTA was used in the emergency department evaluation of suspected ACS.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
-
In this study in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS), women had a lower incidence of obstructive coronary artery disease on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) than men.
-
Women were less often admitted to hospital than men.
-
Women underwent less outpatient testing when early CCTA was used in the emergency department evaluation of suspected ACS than men.
Introduction
There are distinct pathophysiological differences in coronary artery disease (CAD) between men and women. Men are more likely to have obstructive epicardial CAD, while women are more prone to have coronary microvascular dysfunction [1]. In addition, disease perception may differ, both from the physician’s perspective—leading to sex-specific referral bias—and the patient’s own perception of chest discomfort, both of which can result in underrecognition of the burden of CAD in women [2]. The optimal diagnostic test in the work-up of suspected acute coronary syndrome (ACS) may therefore be different for men and women [3].
In this prespecified subanalysis of the Better Evaluation of Acute Chest Pain with Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (BEACON) trial, we compared the clinical presentation, coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) results and the subsequent effect on downstream healthcare utilisation in men and women with suspected ACS.
Methods
The study design, the criteria for enrolment and the primary results have been reported previously [4]. Briefly, in the BEACON trial, we randomised 500 patients suspected of having ACS (47% women, 79% of whom were evaluated with a high-sensitivity (hs) troponin assay) at the emergency department of seven hospitals to receive either standard of care (SOC) or a diagnostic strategy supplemented with early CCTA. In the SOC group, the attending physicians made clinical decisions regarding further testing, including repeated cardiac marker assessment, hospital admission, noninvasive tests and referral to invasive coronary angiography, according to relevant guidelines [5, 6]. The results of the main study showed that CCTA, which was applied early in the work-up of suspected ACS, is safe and is associated with less outpatient testing and lower costs. Data concerning particular endpoints, including coronary angiography, coronary revascularisation, hospital admission, length of stay, repeat emergency department visit and outpatient testing, were collected within 30 days of follow-up.
In the current analysis, non–sex-specific 99th percentile upper reference limits of normal were used for all troponin assays, conventional or high-sensitivity, with the exception of the Hs-TnI assay (Abbott ARCHITECT, Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL, USA), for which vendor-recommended sex-specific cut-off values were used. ACS was defined as either unstable angina pectoris or myocardial infarction (MI), according to the Third Universal Definition of MI [7].
Statistical analysis
Continuous data are presented as mean ± standard deviation or median (interquartile range), and categorical data are presented as proportion (percentage). Differences between independent groups were compared using the analysis of variance or the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables, and the Fisher’s exact test or the Pearson’s chi-square test for categorical variables. All tests were two-tailed and a p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The study was conducted according to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the local institutional review boards. All patients provided written informed consent. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01413282).
Results
In the BEACON trial, women were generally older than men (56 ± 10 vs 53 ± 10 years, p < 0.01), less often active smokers and received less pharmacological treatment (Tab. 1). Table S1 in the Electronic Supplementary Material lists all troponin assays used, their characteristics and the algorithm with which they were implemented. ACS was less often diagnosed in women than in men (5% vs 10%, p = 0.03), and obstructive CAD on CCTA (> 50% luminal narrowing) was less frequently seen in women (14% vs 26%, p < 0.02).
Women were admitted less often (33% vs 42%, p = 0.04). The use of invasive coronary angiography (11% vs 17%, p = 0.07) and the rate of coronary revascularisation (6% vs 9%, p = 0.25) were not statistically different between women and men, although referral to invasive coronary angiography was numerically higher in men (Tab. 1).
Tab. 2 shows the study endpoints when comparing both diagnostic groups based on sex. Women underwent less outpatient testing when early CCTA was used in the emergency department evaluation of suspected ACS (p = 0.008).
Tab. 3 shows the study endpoints when comparing both sexes within each diagnostic group. In the CCTA arm, men were more likely to be diagnosed with MI at discharge than women (p = 0.03). Furthermore, although not statistically significant, in the SOC arm, women were less likely to be admitted to hospital (p = 0.07) and had a shorter length of stay (p = 0.08) than men.
Discussion
In this prespecified analysis of the BEACON trial, women had a lower incidence of obstructive CAD on CCTA and were less often admitted to hospital than men. Women also underwent less outpatient testing when early CCTA was used in the emergency department evaluation of suspected ACS. Although not statistically significant, in the SOC arm, women were less likely to be admitted to hospital and had a shorter length of stay than men.
The presence of sex differences in the pathophysiology of ischaemic heart disease is becoming increasingly apparent [8, 9]. Previously, it has been shown that early CCTA may be a more efficient work-up for suspected ACS, especially in women. In a study by Truong et al., women showed a greater reduction in length of stay and hospital admission than men when early CCTA was used in the emergency department evaluation of suspected ACS [10]. The lower burden of CAD in women was thought to be a likely explanation for this difference, as physicians felt less need to perform downstream tests in patients with non-obstructive CAD on CCTA [10]. Although, we did not see similar reductions in hospital admission and length of stay, women underwent less outpatient testing than men when early CCTA was used. This reduction may also be due to the fact that women had a lower burden of CAD on CCTA, which in turn more often reassured physicians not to perform outpatient testing compared with men.
Although patients with angina without obstructive CAD have a better prognosis than those with obstructive epicardial CAD, they are still at higher risk of cardiovascular disease outcomes than the background population. Therefore, physicians should be vigilant in patients with recurring angina without obstructive epicardial CAD, especially in women, and initiate further evaluation of microvascular disease and treat accordingly.
A novelty in our study was the availability of hs-troponins for clinical decision-making in most of the patients. The introduction of hs-troponin assays has altered our perspective on MI and the way we practice medicine. These new cardiac biomarkers pick up myocardial injury fast and very precisely; serial low values almost certainly exclude MI [11, 12]. In the current study, the majority of the patients with available hs-troponins (> 90%) had normal levels (< 99th percentile of the upper limit of normal), which reassured treating physicians to discharge patients expeditiously, regardless of sex.
However, the improved sensitivity of these new biomarker assays has led to an increasing number of patients being diagnosed with myocardial injury causa ignota. Myocardial injury can be the result of type I MI associated with coronary plaque disruption or other types of MI, non-coronary heart disease or even non-cardiac diseases. Myocardial injury, irrespective of the cause, is associated with a less favourable prognosis and there are also sex-specific differences regarding the cause of injury [13,14,15]. Although this type of conclusions cannot be drawn from our own data, it is believed that women more often have other conditions than obstructive epicardial CAD that cause myocardial injury, such as coronary vasospasm or dissection [16, 17]. As a noninvasive anatomical modality, CCTA can serve as a gatekeeper of traditional coronary angiography by discriminating between obstructive and non-obstructive epicardial CAD.
Study limitations
The current study does have some limitations that need to be highlighted. We have presented short-term data, but outpatient testing could also have taken place more than 30 days after the index presentation. In addition, the heterogeneity of troponin assays implemented in the current study could have impacted the diagnostic process and the downstream healthcare utilisation for both women and men. Finally, due to conflicting evidence and a lack of universally accepted sex-specific 99th percentile cut-offs, we were unable to implement sex-specific cut-offs for certain assays used in this study, with the exception of the hs-TnI assay (Abbott ARCHITECT).
Conclusion
Compared with men, women had a lower incidence of obstructive CAD on CCTA, were less often admitted and underwent less outpatient testing when early CCTA was used in the emergency department evaluation of suspected ACS.
References
Taqueti VR, Shaw LJ, Cook NR, et al. Excess cardiovascular risk in women relative to men referred for coronary angiography is associated with severely impaired coronary flow reserve, not obstructive disease. Circulation. 2017;135:566–77.
Douglas PS, Ginsburg GS. The evaluation of chest pain in women. N Engl J Med. 1996;334:1311–5.
Mieres JH, Shaw LJ, Arai A, et al. Role of noninvasive testing in the clinical evaluation of women with suspected coronary artery disease: Consensus statement from the Cardiac Imaging Committee, Council on Clinical Cardiology, and the Cardiovascular Imaging and Intervention Committee, Council on Cardiovascular Radiology and Intervention, American Heart Association. Circulation. 2005;111:682–96.
Dedic A, Lubbers MM, Schaap J, et al. Coronary CT angiography for suspected ACS in the era of high-sensitivity troponins: randomized multicenter study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:16–26.
Amsterdam EA, Wenger NK, Brindis RG, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:e139–e228.
Hamm CW, Bassand JP, Agewall S, et al. ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2011;32:2999–3054.
Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, et al. Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1581–98.
Berger JS, Elliott L, Gallup D, et al. Sex differences in mortality following acute coronary syndromes. JAMA. 2009;302:874–82.
Chokshi NP, Iqbal SN, Berger RL, et al. Sex and race are associated with the absence of epicardial coronary artery obstructive disease at angiography in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Clin Cardiol. 2010;33:495–501.
Truong QA, Hayden D, Woodard PK, et al. Sex differences in the effectiveness of early coronary computed tomographic angiography compared with standard emergency department evaluation for acute chest pain: the rule-out myocardial infarction with Computer-Assisted Tomography (ROMICAT)-II Trial. Circulation. 2013;127:2494–502.
Mokhtari A, Borna C, Gilje P, et al. A 1‑h combination algorithm allows fast rule-out and rule-in of major adverse cardiac events. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2016;67:1531–40.
Reichlin T, Twerenbold R, Wildi K, et al. Prospective validation of a 1-hour algorithm to rule-out and rule-in acute myocardial infarction using a high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T assay. Cmaj. 2015;187:E243–E52.
Barr PR, Harrison W, Smyth D, Flynn C, Lee M, Kerr AJ. Myocardial infarction without obstructive coronary artery disease is not a benign condition (ANZACS-QI 10). Heart Lung Circ. 2018;27:165–74.
Pasupathy S, Air T, Dreyer RP, Tavella R, Beltrame JF. Systematic review of patients presenting with suspected myocardial infarction and nonobstructive coronary arteries. Circulation. 2015;131:861–70.
Smilowitz NR, Mahajan AM, Roe MT, et al. Mortality of myocardial infarction by sex, age, and obstructive coronary artery disease status in the ACTION registry-GWTG (acute coronary treatment and intervention outcomes network registry-get with the guidelines). Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2017;10:e3443.
Harmony RR, Monvadi BS, Sohah NI, et al. Mechanisms of myocardial infarction in women without angiographically obstructive coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2011;124:1414–25.
Tweet MS, Hayes SN, Pitta SR, et al. Clinical features, management, and prognosis of spontaneous coronary artery dissection. Circulation. 2012;126:579–88.
Acknowledgements
We thank medical personnel at all participating centres who made this study possible.
Funding
This work was supported by a grant from the Erasmus University Medical Centre and a research grant from the Erasmus MC Thorax Foundation (project grant B4).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
M. Arslan, J. Schaap, A. Moelker, P. P. M. Rood, E. Boersma, E. A. Dubois and A. Dedic declare that they have no competing interests. K. Nieman has received a grant from the Dutch Heart Foundation (NHS 2014T061) and grants from Siemens Medical Solutions, GE Healthcare, Bayer Healthcare and HeartFlow outside the submitted work.
Supplementary Information
Tab. S1
Detailed information on the troponin assays used
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Arslan, M., Schaap, J., Moelker, A. et al. Coronary CT angiography for suspected acute coronary syndrome: sex-associated differences. Neth Heart J 29, 518–524 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12471-021-01607-1
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12471-021-01607-1