Characteristics, management, and outcomes in women and men with congestive heart failure in 40 countries at different economic levels: an analysis from the Global Congestive Heart Failure (G-CHF) registry
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of women compared with men with heart failure in low-income and middle-income countries compared with high-income countries. We examined sex differences in risk factors, clinical characteristics, and treatments, and prospectively assessed the risk of heart failure hospitalisation and mortality in patients with heart failure in 40 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries. METHODS: Participants aged 18 years or older with heart failure were enrolled from Dec 20, 2016, to Sept 9, 2020 in the prospective Global Congestive Heart Failure (G-CHF) study from 257 centres in 40 high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries. Participants were followed up until May 25, 2023. We recorded the demographic characteristics, medical history, and treatments of participants. We prospectively recorded data on heart failure hospitalisation and mortality by sex in the overall study, according to country economic status, and according to level of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). FINDINGS: 23 341 participants (9119 [39·1%] women and 14 222 [60·1%] men) were recruited and followed up for a mean of 2·6 years (SD 1·4). The mean age of women in the study was 62 years (SD 17) compared with 64 years (14) in men. Fewer women than men had an LVEF of 40% or lower (51·7% women vs 66·2% men). By contrast, more women than men had an LVEF of 50% or higher (33·2% women vs 18·6% men). Hypertensive heart failure was the most common aetiology in women (25·5% women vs 16·8% men), whereas ischaemic heart failure was the most common aetiology in men (45·6% men vs 26·6% women). Signs and symptoms of congestion were more common in women than men: 42·6% of women had a New York Heart Association functional class of III or IV compared with 37·9% of men. The use of heart failure medications and cardiac tests did not differ systematically between the sexes, although implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation was lower among women than men (8·7% women vs 17·2% men). The adjusted risk of heart failure hospitalisation was similar in women and men (women-to-men adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·99 [95% CI 0·92-1·05]). This pattern was consistent within groups of countries categorised by economic status, geographical region, and by LVEF level. However, women had a lower adjusted risk of mortality (women-to-men adjusted HR 0·79 [95% CI 0·75-0·84]) despite adjustments for prognostic factors-a pattern which was consistently observed across groups of countries irrespective of economic status, geography, and LVEF levels of patients. INTERPRETATION: The underlying cause of heart failure and ejection fraction phenotype differ between women and men, as do the severity of symptoms. Heart failure treatments (except ICD use) were not consistently in favour of one sex. Paradoxically, while the rates of hospitalisations were similar among women and men, the risk of death was lower among women. These patterns were consistent regardless of the economic status of the countries. The higher mortality among men is unexplained and warrants further study. FUNDING: Bayer.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».