STRUCTURED ABSTRACT Objectives To determine whether presentation, risk assessment, testing choices, and results differ by sex in stable symptomatic outpatients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Background Although established CAD presentations differ by sex, little is known about stable, suspected CAD. Methods Characteristics of 10,003 men and women in the Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain (PROMISE) trial were compared using chi-square and Wilcoxon rank sum tests. Sex differences in test selection and predictors of test positivity were examined using logistic regression. Results Women were older (62.4 years vs. 59.0) and more likely to be hypertensive (66.6% vs. 63.2%), dyslipidemic (68.9% vs. 66.3%), and to have a family history of premature CAD (34.6% vs. 29.3) (all p-values<0.005). Women were less likely to smoke (45.6% vs. 57.0%; p<0.001), while diabetes prevalence was similar (21.8% vs. 21.0%; p=0.30). Chest pain was the primary symptom in 73.2% of women vs. 72.3% of men (p=0.30) and was characterized as “crushing/pressure/squeezing/tightness” in 52.5% of women vs. 46.2% of men (p<0.001). Compared to men, all risk scores characterized women as lower risk, and providers were more likely to characterize women as having low (<30%) pre-test probability for CAD (40.7% vs. 34.1%; p<0.001). Compared with men, women were more often referred to imaging tests (adjusted OR 1.21; 95% CI 1.01–1.44) than non-imaging tests. Women were less likely to have a positive test (9.7% vs. 15.1%; p<0.001). Although univariate predictors of test positivity were similar, in multivariable models, age, BMI, and Framingham risk score were predictive of a positive test in women, while Framingham and Diamond and Forrester risk scores were predictive in men. Conclusion Patient sex influences the entire diagnostic pathway for possible CAD, from baseline risk factors and presentation to noninvasive test outcomes. These differences highlight the need for sex-specific approaches to CAD evaluation.

Clinical core laboratories, such as Echocardiography core laboratories, are increasingly used in clinical studies with imaging outcomes as primary, secondary, or surrogate endpoints. While many factors contribute to the quality of measurements of imaging variables, an essential step in ensuring the value of imaging data includes formal assessment and control of reproducibility via intra-observer and inter-observer reliability. There are many different agreement/reliability indices in the literature. However, different indices may lead to different conclusions and it is not clear which index is the preferred choice as an overall indication of data quality and a tool for providing guidance on improving quality and reliability in a core lab setting. In this paper, we pre-specify the desirable characteristics of an agreement index for assessing and improving reproducibility in a core lab setting; we compare existing agreement indices in terms of these characteristics to choose a preferred index. We conclude that, among the existing indices reviewed, the coverage probability for assessing agreement is the preferred agreement index on the basis of computational simplicity, its ability for rapid identification of discordant measurements to provide guidance for review and retraining, and its consistent evaluation of data quality across multiple reviewers, populations, and continuous/categorical data.

No abstract

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02388464.

Myocardial infarction (MI) is defined by the presence of myocardial necrosis in combination with clinical evidence of myocardial ischemia. Cardiac troponins are regulatory proteins within the myocardium that are released into the circulation when damage to the myocyte has occurred. Therefore, serum troponin is an exquisitely sensitive marker of myocardial injury and is necessary for establishing the diagnosis of MI. High-sensitivity troponin assays are improving the diagnostic accuracy and rapid detection of myocardial infarction. The early identification of MI is vital for the institution of anti-thrombotic therapy to limit myocardial damage and preserve cardiac function. Troponin has both diagnostic and prognostic significance in the setting of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Increased troponin levels in the absence of ACS should prompt an evaluation for an alternative, non-thrombotic mechanism of troponin elevation and direct management at the underlying cause. This review describes the role of troponin in the evaluation of patients with suspected myocardial infarction.

No abstract

Longitudinal assessment of the PARTNER I trial (THE PARTNER TRIAL: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial) demonstrates that valve performance and cardiac hemodynamics are stable after implantation in both SAPIEN TAVR and SAVR in patients alive at 5 years. (THE PARTNER TRIAL: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894).

Background Risk stratification is an important goal of cardiac noninvasive tests (NITs), yet little contemporary data exist on the prognostic value of different NITs by patient sex. Objectives To compare the results and prognostic information derived from anatomic versus stress testing in stable men and women with suspected coronary artery disease. Methods In 8966 PROMISE trial patients tested as randomized (4500 computed tomographic angiography [CTA], 52% female; 4466 stress testing, 53% female), we assessed the relationship between sex and NIT results using logistic regression, and the relationship between sex and a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and unstable angina hospitalization using Cox proportional hazards models. Results In women, a positive CTA (≥70% stenosis) was less likely than a positive stress test (8% vs. 12%, adjusted OR 0.67 [95% CI 0.55-0.82]). Compared with negative tests, a positive CTA was more strongly associated with subsequent clinical events than a positive stress test (CTA adjusted HR 5.86 [95% CI 3.32-10.35]; stress adjusted HR 2.27 [95% CI 1.21-4.25]; adjusted p=0.028). Men were more likely to have a positive CTA than stress test (16% vs. 14%, adjusted OR 1.23 [95% CI 1.04-1.47]). Compared with negative tests, a positive CTA was less strongly associated with subsequent clinical events than a positive stress test in men, although this difference was not statistically significant (CTA adjusted HR 2.80 [95% CI 1.76-4.45]; stress adjusted HR 4.42 [95% CI 2.77-7.07]; adjusted p=0.168). Negative CTA and stress tests were equally likely to predict an event in both sexes (adjusted p-values=NS). A significant interaction between sex, NIT type, and test result (p=0.01) suggests that sex and NIT type jointly influence the relationship between test result and clinical events. Conclusions The prognostic value of an NIT result varies by test type and patient sex. Women appear to derive more prognostic information from a CTA, while men tend to derive similar prognostic value from both test types.