4.2 Article

Gender Differences in the Types and Frequency of Coronary Artery Anomalies

Journal

TOHOKU JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE
Volume 225, Issue 4, Pages 239-247

Publisher

TOHOKU UNIV MEDICAL PRESS
DOI: 10.1620/tjem.225.239

Keywords

Congenital anomaly; coronary artery anomaly; fistula; gender; myocardial bridge

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Coronary artery anomalies are rarely encountered in general population. Gender may play a role in the types and incidence of coronary artery anomalies, although the effect of gender is not well established. In the present study, we therefore aimed to investigate the frequency and location of various types of coronary artery anomalies and their correlation with gender. We assessed retrospectively the coronary angiography movies of 7,810 patients (2,214 females and 5,596 males), the method of which is distinct from the earlier studies with angiographic archive records. We defined and classified the coronary artery anomalies according to their origin, course (myocardial bridge), and termination (fistula). The incidence of coronary artery anomalies was 3.35% (262 of 7,810): 130 individuals with anomalous origin (1.66%), 105 individuals with myocardial bridges (1.34%), and 27 with fistulas (0.35%). The frequency of the coronary artery anomalies was significantly higher in the females than the males (p = 0.001). Of the coronary artery origin anomalies, the circumflex and the left anterior descending artery originating from separate ostia in the left aortic sinus were higher in the females compared to the males (P < 0.001). In contrast, the frequency of myocardial bridges was higher in the males (P = 0.01). No gender difference was detected in fistulas. Thus, gender affects the types of coronary artery anomalies, except for fistulas. The determination of the presence of the coronary artery anomalies during the coronary angiography is critical for the planning of the treatment and for the proper clinical follow-up of patients.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available