- Bliv medlem
-
Log ind
Du er ikke logget ind
Log ind Opret dig - Kurv
Du er ikke logget ind
Beskrivelse
Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death among women in the United States. More than 500,000 women die of cardiovascular disease each year, exceeding the number of deaths in men and the next seven causes of death in women combined. This translates into approximately one death every minute. This report focuses on women because of the differences in clinical presentation and extent and location of coronary disease on presentation, which affect the treatment options for coronary artery disease (CAD). Currently available guidelines and systematic reviews provide specific treatment recommendations for women only among a subset of treatment options, and overall assume that treatment options are equally effective for both sexes when gender data are not available. However, women have a worse prognosis than men for manifestations of CAD such as acute myocardial infarction, and some data suggest that women and men may not respond equally to the same treatments. Further, women are more likely than men to experience bleeding complications. In 2012, a Comparative Effectiveness Review (CER), "Treatment Strategies for Women With Coronary Artery Disease," attempted to assess the comparative effectiveness of the major treatment options for CAD specifically in women, evaluating these comparisons: 1. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus fibrinolysis or PCI versus conservative/supportive medical management in women with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) 2. Early invasive versus initial conservative management in women with unstable angina or non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI) 3. PCI versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) versus optimal medical therapy in women with stable or unstable angina Given the clinical and economic importance of treating CAD in women, the ongoing investment in CAD research on medical therapy, PCI and CABG, and the remaining areas of uncertainty, we sought to create a prioritized future research agenda that would represent the interests of diverse stakeholders and allow the remaining areas of uncertainty to be addressed.
