ArticleJACC. Advances2026
Contemporary Data on Sex Differences in Coronary Angiography Findings: A Dual-Nation Study.
Article in JACC. Advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSex differences in the diagnostic yield of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) are well established, but contemporary population-level data incorporating high-sensitivity troponin era cohorts and cross-national validation remain limited.
objectivesThe objectives of the study were to assess sex differences in diagnostic yield, revascularization rates, and 1-year outcomes in patients undergoing first-time ICA for suspected NSTE-ACS.
methodsUsing data from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry with validation in the Western Denmark Heart Registry. Adults without previously known coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing first-time ICA for suspected NSTE-ACS were included. The primary outcome was the absence of significant CAD, defined as a normal angiography or <50% stenosis in all major epicardial vessels. Multivariable Poisson regression models were used to estimate adjusted risk ratios (aRRs). Secondary outcomes were 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events, comparing women and men with and without obstructive CAD using Kaplan-Meier estimates and adjusted Cox proportional hazards models.
resultsA total of 74,883 and 17,863 patients were included from Sweden and Western Denmark. Women had approximately twice the proportion without significant CAD compared to men in Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (40.9% vs 17.2%; aRR: 2.59; 95% CI: 2.51-2.67) and Western Denmark Heart Registry (50.1% vs 25.2%; aRR: 2.01; 95% CI: 1.95-2.08). In women below the age of 50 without any traditional cardiovascular risk factors, 74.8% had no significant CAD.
conclusionsIn 2 population-based cohorts undergoing first-time ICA for suspected NSTE-ACS, 40 to 50% of women had no significant CAD, approximately twice the proportion to men, highlighting ongoing challenges in risk stratification of patients referred for ICA.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.