Background There are limited data on the influence of gender on risk factors and clinical outcomes in young patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).
Methods This prospective study stratified outcomes according to gender in patients of age ≤50 years with a diagnosis of AMI, and who were enrolled in the nationwide registry of the Korea Working Group of Myocardial Infarction. The end point was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) defined as the composite of cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat revascularisation at 30 days and 1 year after admission.
Results The registry enrolled 30 001 patients with AMI, of whom 5200 met the study inclusion criteria; 4805 patients were male and 395 were female. Current smoking was significantly higher in men, while hypertension and diabetes mellitus were significantly more common in women. Women underwent less coronary revascularisation, and were less likely to be on optimal medical therapy compared with men despite having a higher Killip class at presentation and higher risk angiographic findings. Although women had higher rates of MACEs (3.8% vs 1.8%, p=0.018 at 30 days and 7.8% vs 4.7%, p=0.004 at 1-year follow-up) compared with men, female gender was not an independent predictor of MACEs after adjusting for propensity score.
Conclusions There were significant gender differences in the risk factors for coronary artery disease and the short-term and long-term clinical outcomes of young patients with AMI. Continued preventive strategies should be focused on gender-different risk factor reduction in these young patients.
- CHD/CORONORARY HEART
- Clinical epidemiology
- Outcome Research Evaluation
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors MHJ and E-SS designed the study, SHA and A-YH directed its implementation, and JHH supported the study's analytic strategy. JSK collected the data, and SG helped conduct the literature review. KIC and E-SS prepared the Methods and the Discussion sections of the text and had overall responsibility for the manuscript. All the authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Obtained.
Ethics approval The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board at each participating centre in KAMIR Registry.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.