Search

Background: Early menopause has been associated with increased cardiovascular mortality, but prospective studies investigating outcomes of postmenopausal women with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in relation to menopausal age are lacking., Methods: We analyzed the 1-year outcome of 373 women with acute myocardial infarction enrolled in the Ladies ACS study. All patients underwent coronary angiography, with corelab analysis. Menopause questionnaires were administered during admission. Menopausal age below the median of the study population (50 years) was defined as "early menopause". The composite 1-year outcome included all-cause mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction and stroke., Results: The mean age at index ACS was 73 years (IQR 65-83) for women with early menopause, and 74 (IQR 65-80) for those with late menopause. Patients with early menopause had more prevalent chronic kidney disease (12.8% vs 5.9%, p = 0.03), whereas there were no differences in all other clinical characteristics, extent of coronary disease at angiography (as assessed by Gensini and SYNTAX scores), as well as interventional treatments. Within 1 year, women with late menopause had significantly better outcome as compared with those with early menopause (6.5% vs 15.3%, p = 0.007). At logistic regression analysis, late menopause was independently associated with better outcome (OR 0.28; 95% CI 0.12-0.67; p = 0.004). With each year's delay in the menopause the adjusted risk decreased by 12% (OR 0.88, 0.77-0.99, p = 0.040)., Conclusion: Despite comparable clinical and angiographic characteristics, women with late menopausal age experience better outcomes after an ACS as compared with those with early menopause., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Recent advances in the field of cardiovascular medicine have not led to significant declines in case-fatality rates for women as in men. There are gender-specific differences in symptoms profile, diagnosis and treatment of coronary disease in women. For women presenting for coronary heart disease (CHD) evaluation, traditional disease management approaches that focus on detection of a 'critical stenosis' often fail to identify those women critically at-risk. Symptoms do not help physicians in differential diagnosis of chest pain in women; indeed the most common presentation of obstructive CHD in women is atypical symptoms. In 50% of the cases, non-obstructive CHD at coronary angiography, due to 'noncardiac chest pain' or coronary microvascular dysfunction is frequently reported. For these reasons, the evidence reviewed suggests that prognostic risk assessment may work relatively better than diagnostic obstructive coronary disease assessment for women., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)