Sex differences in acute coronary syndrome symptom presentation in young patients

IMPORTANCE Little is known about whether sex differences in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) presentation exist in young patients and what factors determine absence of chest pain in ACS presentation. OBJECTIVES To evaluate sex differences in ACS presentation and to estimate associations between sex, sociodemographic, gender identity, psychosocial and clinical factors, markers of coronary disease severity, and absence of chest pain in young patients with ACS. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS We conducted a prospective cohort study of 1015 patients (30% women) 55 years or younger, hospitalized for ACS and enrolled in the GENESIS PRAXY (Gender and Sex Determinants of Cardiovascular Disease: From Bench to Beyond Premature Acute Coronary Syndrome) study (January 2009-September 2012). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The McSweeney Acute and Prodromal Myocardial Infarction Symptom Survey was administered during hospitalization. RESULTS The median age for both sexes was 49 years. Women were more likely to have non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (37.5 vs 30.7; P = .03) and present without chest pain compared with men (19.0% vs 13.7%; P = .03). Patients without chest pain reported fewer symptoms overall and no discernable pattern of non-chest pain symptoms was found. In the multivariate model, being a woman (odds ratio [OR], 1.95 [95% CI, 1.23-3.11]; P = .005) and tachycardia (OR, 2.07 [95% CI, 1.20-3.56]; P = .009) were independently associated with ACS presentation without chest pain. Patients without chest pain did not differ significantly from those with chest pain in terms of ACS type, troponin level elevation, or coronary stenosis. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Chest pain was the most common ACS symptom in both sexes. Although women were more likely to present without chest pain than men, absence of chest pain was not associated with markers of coronary disease severity. Strategies that explicitly incorporate assessment of common non-chest pain symptoms need to be evaluated

DOACs – advances and limitations in real world

The group of new oral anticoagulants or NOACs, now termed direct oral anticoagulants or DOACs, with their favourable results from large scale phase III clinical trials, represent a major advancement and expanded armamentarium in antithrombotic therapy. Dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban are now in clinical routine use for prevention and treatment of arterial and venous thrombotic diseases as addressed in their clinical trials. Usage of the DOACs is expected to increase as clinicians gain more experience and reassurance with data from the real world studies which are generally consistent with that from clinical trials. Development of specific antidotes in management of bleeding complications and development of coagulation assays for their plasma levels will further boost the confidence in the DOACs. Nonetheless, there are still limitations associated with the DOACs. Many patients in need of anticoagulant therapy for indications not studied in the clinical trials will not be eligible for treatment with a DOAC. Conditions where more data is required include DOACs use in the paediatric age group, patients with atrial fibrillation and valvular heart disease, thrombosis associated with the anti-phospholipid syndrome and cancer associated thrombosis. The affordability and access to these drugs may pose an issue for many patients under healthcare systems not providing for these medications. With four new anticoagulants coming onboard very quickly, the focus has shifted to the practical approach and management in real life as many clinicians are not yet familiar with the DOACs. Clinicians need to be educated on how to manage this new class for drugs, from choosing the appropriate drug to prevention and managing bleeding complications as a lack of knowledge and understanding in these drugs will lead to inappropriate use and compromise on patient safety