Significant gender-related differences in radiofrequency catheter ablation therapy

Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Volumn 42, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 1103-1107

  Dagres, Nikolaos ^a,c   Clague, Jonathan R ^a,d   Breithardt, Günter ^a   Borggrefe, Martin ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MÜNSTER   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^c 401 GENERAL MILITARY HOSPITAL OF ATHENS   (Greece)

^d ROYAL BROMPTON HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTIARRHYTHMIC AGENT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ATRIOVENTRICULAR NODAL REENTRANT TACHYCARDIA ABLATION; CARDIOVASCULAR PROCEDURES; CATHETER ABLATION; CHILD; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FLUOROSCOPY; HEART ATRIOVENTRICULAR NODE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECURRENT DISEASE; REENTRY TACHYCARDIA; SEX DIFFERENCE; TACHYCARDIA; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0043236469     PISSN: 07351097     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0735-1097(03)00925-2     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Jackman WM, Beckman KJ, McClelland JH, et al. Treatment of supraventricular tachycardia due to atrioventricular nodal reentry, by radiofrequency catheter ablation of slow-pathway conduction. N Engl J Med 1992;327:313-8.
2. Kuck KH, Schlüter M, Geiger M, Siebels J, Duckeck W. Radiofrequency current catheter ablation of accessory atrioventricular pathways. Lancet 1991;337:1557-61.
3. Kalbfleisch SJ, Strickberger SA, Williamson B, et al. Randomized comparison of anatomic and electrogram mapping approaches to ablation of the slow pathway of atrioventricular node reentrant tachycardia. J Am Coll Cardiol 1994;23:716-23.
4. Calkins H, Yong P, Miller JM, et al. Catheter ablation of accessory pathways, atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia, and the atrioventricular junction: final results of a prospective, multicenter clinical trial. Circulation 1999;99:262-70.
5. Langberg JJ, Calkins H, Kim YN, et al. Recurrence of conduction in accessory atrioventricular connections after initially successful radiofrequency catheter ablation. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992;19:1588-92.
6. Timmermans C, Smeets JL, Rodriguez LM, et al. Recurrence rate after accessory pathway ablation. Br Heart J 1994;72:571-4.
7. Vasan RS, Larson MG, Levy D, Evans JC, Benjamin EJ. Distribution and categorization of echocardiographic measurements in relation to reference limits. The Framingham Heart Study: formulation of a height- and sex-specific classification and its prospective validation. Circulation 1997;96:1863-73.
8. Salton CJ, Chuang ML, O'Donnell CJ, et al. Gender differences and normal left ventricular anatomy in an adult population free of hypertension. A cardiovascular magnetic resonance study of the Framingham Heart Study Offspring cohort. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39:1055-60.
9. O'Connor NJ, Morton JR, Birkmeyer JD, Olmstead EM, O'Connor GT. Effect of coronary artery diameter in patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery. Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. Circulation 1996;93:652-5.
10. Dodge JT Jr, Brown BG, Bolson EL, Dodge HT. Lumen diameter of normal human coronary arteries. Influence of age, sex, anatomic variation, and left ventricular hypertrophy or dilation. Circulation 1992;86:232-46.
11. Woods SE, Noble G, Smith JM, Hasselfeld K. The influence of gender in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: an eight-year prospective hospitalized cohort study. J Am Coll Surg 2003;196:428-34.
12. Van Domburg RT, Foley DP, de Jaegere PP, et al. Long-term outcome after coronary stent implantation: a 10-year single centre experience of 1000 patients. Heart 1999;82 Suppl 2:II27-34.
13. Jacobs AK, Johnston JM, Haviland A, et al. Improved outcomes for women undergoing contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention: a report from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39:1608-14.
14. Cantor WJ, Miller JM, Hellkamp AS, et al. Role of target vessel size and body surface area on outcomes after percutaneous coronary interventions in women. Am Heart J 2002;144:297-302.
15. Ayanian JZ, Epstein AM. Differences in the use of procedures between women and men hospitalized for coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med 1991;325:221-5.
16. Tobin JN, Wassertheil-Smoller S, Wexler JP, et al. Sex bias in considering coronary bypass surgery. Ann Intern Med 1987;107:19-25.
17. Khan SS, Nessim S, Gray R, Czer LS, Chaux A, Matloff J. Increased mortality of women in coronary artery bypass surgery: evidence for referral bias. Ann Intern Med 1990;112:561-7.
18. Aguilar MD, Lazaro P, Fitch K, Luengo S. Gender differences in clinical status at time of coronary revascularisation in Spain. J Epidemiol Community Health 2002;56:555-9.
19. Wong CC, Froelicher ES, Bacchetti P, et al. Influence of gender on cardiovascular mortality in acute myocardial infarction patients with high indication for coronary angiography. Circulation 1997;96 Suppl:II51-7.
20. Heer T, Schiele R, Schneider S, et al. Gender differences in acute myocardial infarction in the era of reperfusion (the MITRA registry). Am J Cardiol 2002;89:511-7.
21. De Gevigney G, Mosnier S, Ecochard R, et al. Are women with acute myocardial infarction managed as well as men? Does it have consequences on in-hospital mortality? Analysis of an unselected cohort of 801 women and 1,718 men. Acta Cardiol 2001;56:169-79.
22. Mahon NG, McKenna CJ, Codd MB, O'Rorke C, McCann HA, Sugrue DD. Gender differences in the management and outcome of acute myocardial infarction in unselected patients in the thrombolytic era. Am J Cardiol 2000;85:921-6.
23. Herold AH, Riker AI, Warner EA, et al. Evidence of gender bias in patients undergoing flexible sigmoidoscopy. Cancer Detect Prev 1997;21:141-7.
24. Dagres N, Clague JR, Kottkamp H, Hindricks G, Breithardt G, Borggrefe M. Radiofrequency catheter ablation of accessory pathways. Outcome and use of antiarrhythmic drugs during follow-up. Eur Heart J 1999;20:1826-32.
25. Clague JR, Dagres N, Kottkamp H, Breithardt G, Borggrefe M. Targeting the slow pathway for atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia: initial results and long-term follow-up in 379 consecutive patients. Eur Heart J 2001;22:82-8.
26. Hindricks G. The Multicentre European Radiofrequency Survey (MERFS): complications of radiofrequency catheter ablation of arrhythmias. Eur Heart J 1993;14:1644-53.
27. Lessmeier TJ, Gamperling D, Johnson-Liddon V, et al. Unrecognized paroxysmal supraventricular tachycardia. Potential for misdiagnosis as panic disorder. Arch Intern Med 1997;157:537-43.
28. Rosenthal LS, Mahesh M, Beck TJ, et al. Predictors of fluoroscopy time and estimated radiation exposure during radiofrequency catheter ablation procedures. Am J Cardiol 1998;82:451-8.
29. Calkins H, Niklason L, Sousa J, el-Atassi R, Langberg J, Morady F. Radiation exposure during radiofrequency catheter ablation of accessory atrioventricular connections. Circulation 1991;84:2376-82.
30. Strickberger SA, Daoud EG, Weiss R, et al. A randomized comparison of fixed power and temperature monitoring during slow pathway ablation in patients with atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 1997;1:299-303.
31. Manolis AS, Wang PJ, Estes NA. Radiofrequency ablation of slow pathway in patients with atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia. Do arrhythmia recurrences correlate with persistent slow pathway conduction or site of successful ablation? Circulation 1994;90:2815-9.