4.6 Review

Gender differences in risk factors for coronary heart disease

Journal

MATURITAS
Volume 65, Issue 2, Pages 149-160

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2009.09.023

Keywords

Gender; Risk factors; Coronary heart disease

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Coronary heart disease (CND), traditionally considered a male disease, is also a major threat to women. This review article addresses independent risk factors for CHD that are specific for women as well as non-gender-specific risk factors and how their effects differ between men and women. Although polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) in women is associated with an adverse metabolic risk profile, current evidence regarding future risk of CHD is conflicting. Preeclampsia is consistently associated with higher risk of CHD later in life. Menopause is associated with an increased risk of CHD, and the earlier the onset of menopause, the larger the risk. Existing data on postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) was inconclusive with regard to possible protection when HT is initiated close to menopause in young peri- or postmenopausal women. Evidence on use of low-dose oral contraceptives strongly suggests no increased risk of CHD. Although levels of physical inactivity are similar for men and women, the higher prevalences of hypertension, diabetes, and obesity in older women portends a greater risk in women than in men. Additionally, risk factors like smoking, hypertriglyceridemia and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels have greater impact in women than in men. This review indicates that acknowledgement of non-gender-specific risk factors in addition to those that are unique to women would help optimize diagnosis, treatment and earlier prevention of CHD in women. Further research is needed to ascertain if incorporating these gender-specific risks into a clinically used risk stratification model would change outcome in women. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available