Gender and Atrial Fibrillation: Differences and Disparities

Login or register to view PDF.
Abstract

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common clinical arrhythmia encountered. A wealth of evidence has improved our ability to diagnose and effectively treat AF. An intriguing aspect of this common disease – gender-based differences – is well recognized but poorly understood. In this brief review, we will explore the accumulating evidence suggesting a gender-based disparity in the prevalence, pathogenesis and management of AF.

Disclosure
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Correspondence
Naga Venkata Pothineni, MD, 4301 W Markham Street, #532, Little Rock, AR 72205, USA. E: nvpothineni@uams.edu
Received date
21 December 2017
Accepted date
12 January 2018
Citation
US Cardiology Review 2018;12(2):ePub: 14 March 2018.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.15420/usc.2017:39:1

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common clinically relevant supraventricular arrhythmia. AF is a leading risk factor for stroke and accounts for about one-third of all ischemic cerebrovascular events.1 The last two decades have witnessed a paradigm shift in the management of AF with the development of catheter ablation and improvements in anticoagulant therapies. In this review, we discuss gender-related differences and disparities in the pathophysiology, clinical presentation, and management of AF.

Gender Differences in the Pathophysiology of AF

Men are more susceptible to the development of AF. However, since women live longer than men, the cumulative lifetime risk of AF is similar in men and women, at about 30 %.2 On average, women develop AF 10 years later than men.2 Differences in atrial effective refractory period (ERP) in response to rapid atrial pacing have been reported in men and women. The degree of shortening of atrial ERP was significantly less in premenopausal women compared with postmenopausal women and age-matched men, suggesting the protective role of estrogen.3 In addition, non-pulmonary vein triggers are more frequent in women with AF compared with men.4 More recent evidence points to genetic disparities in ion channel expression between men and women. Ambrosi et al. investigated the mRNA expression of 89 ion channel subunits, calcium handling proteins, and transcription factors important in cardiac conduction and arrhythmogenesis.5 Gender-specific analysis showed lower expression levels in transcripts encoding for Kv4.3, KChIP2, Kv1.5, and Kir3.1 in the failing female left atrium compared with the male left atrium. Gender differences in autonomic control of the cardiovascular system have been described as well. Sympathetic-mediated responses predominate in men, while women have higher degrees of parasympathetic activation, which has been associated with an increased propensity of AF due to extensive vagal innervation of the atrial muscle sleeves extending into the pulmonary veins.6

Morphologically, significant gender-based differences in AF-related atrial remodeling have been observed. Fibrotic remodeling of the left atrium leads to electrical dissociation of atrial cells that contributes to higher incidence and recurrence rates of AF. Li et al. analyzed tissue samples from men and women with long-standing, persistent AF and showed that women have a significantly higher degree of fibrotic remodeling compared with men.7 This morphological difference was driven by differential expression of fibrosis-related genes and proteins, such as transforming growth factor-beta, which were upregulated in women with persistent AF. Cochet et al. reported that female gender was independently associated with delayed gadolinium enhancement in patients with AF, as well as in patients with no AF or structural heart disease.8 In a subanalysis of the AF Follow-up Investigation of Rhythm Management (AFFIRM) trial, female gender was significantly associated with higher rates of left atrial remodeling and adverse cardiovascular endpoints.9

Gender modulates how various risk factors contribute to AF.10 Obesity appears to impart a higher risk of AF in men compared with women (hazard ratio [HR] per standard deviation increase 1.18; 95 % CI [1.12–1.23] in women versus 1.31; 95 % CI [1.25–1.38] in men; Pinteraction<0.001). Women with AF have a lower prevalence of coronary disease and sleep apnea compared with men. However, hypertension and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction are more prevalent in women with AF, likely reflecting the later age of onset.

Gender Differences in the Clinical Presentation of AF

Substantial differences in clinical symptomatology of AF exist between men and women. In the Outcomes Registry for Better Informed Treatment of AF (ORBIT-AF) registry, women with AF experienced more symptoms and worse quality of life in comparison with men.10 Similarly, in the Euro Observational Research Program on AF (EORP-AF) pilot survey, women experienced a significantly higher rate of palpitations and fear and anxiety compared with men.11 A similar pattern of AF-related symptoms was also reported in the Prevention of Thromboembolic Events European Registry in AF (PREFER in AF) registry. In this analysis of 7,243 patients, 95 % of women with AF were symptomatic compared with 90 % of men.12

In addition to variations in symptomatology, there are important prognostic differences between women and men with AF. A meta-analysis of 30 studies from 1996 to 2015, including >4 million participants, indicated that female gender is an independent risk factor for all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, incident heart failure, and stroke in patients with AF.13 There are significant disparities in AF-related stroke risk, with women experiencing more strokes as well as more disabling strokes compared with men, as discussed below.

Gender Differences in AF Management

Rate Control

Gender bias is apparent in the choice of medications for rate control of AF. In the ORBIT-AF registry, women were less likely to receive beta-blocker therapy (62.0 % versus 65.5 %) and were more likely to receive digoxin (24.6 % versus 22.6 %).10 In the EORP-AF registry, use of digoxin as a rate-control agent was significantly more common in women (25 % versus 19.8 %), while there was no difference in prescription rates of beta-blockers.11 In the Rivaroxaban Once-Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in AF (ROCKET-AF) trial, digoxin was used in 42 % of female participants compared with 38 % of males, and digoxin use was associated with increased all-cause mortality, vascular death and sudden death.14 Other studies have also revealed an association between digoxin and higher rates of cardiac death.15 In this context, the consistently higher rates of use of digoxin as a rate-control agent is women is concerning. Whether this reflects poor tolerability to commonly used rate-control medications is unknown.

Gender-specific differences also appear to exist in the use of non-pharmacological rate-control measures. In the ORBIT-AF registry, women had significantly higher rates of atrioventricular nodal ablation and pacemaker implantation (adjusted HR 1.97; 95 % CI [1.30–2.97]) compared with men over a median follow-up of 2.3 years.10

Rhythm Control

Gender differences in rates of prescription of anti-arrhythmic medications for AF have been debated. In the EORP-AF survey, rhythm control was less commonly utilized in women despite a higher rate of symptomatic AF and lower quality of life. Rates of electrical cardioversion were 18.9 % in women compared to 25.5 % in men.11 In the PREFER in AF observational cohort, women were more likely to receive pharmacological cardioversion while men had higher rates of electrical cardioversion.12 However, in the ORBIT-AF registry, there was no difference in rates of anti-arrhythmic medication use in women compared with men.10 In a nationwide analysis of all in-patient cardioversions in the US, we have previously reported that in-hospital rates of electrical cardioversion were significantly higher in men compared with women (58.4 % versus 48.6 %).16 Rates of AF recurrence following cardioversion have also been reported to be higher in women.17

In this context, it is important to understand that women appear to have a higher risk of side-effects with rhythm-control strategies. Women with AF on Class IA and Class III anti-arrhythmic medications have higher rates of torsades des pointes and bradyarrhythmias requiring a pacemaker. In the Fibrillation Registry Assessing Costs, Therapies, Adverse Events, and Lifestyle (FRACTAL) registry, Essebag et al. have reported that female gender was an independent risk factor that determines the need for a pacemaker in patients taking amiodarone for AF.18

Catheter Ablation

Catheter ablation has emerged as an important therapeutic strategy in the management of AF. Significant gender disparities in utilization of catheter ablation, in which women are referred late and less frequently for catheter ablation of AF compared with men, have been identified. Women referred for ablation are older and have larger indexed left atrial dimensions.19 In a nationwide analysis of AF ablation procedures, women were 17 % less likely to undergo catheter ablation compared with men.20 Another analysis of AF care strategies in Medicare beneficiaries demonstrated significantly lower referral rates for catheter ablation in women (HR 0.65; 95 % CI [0.63–0.68]), even after adjusting for multiple confounding variables.21 There is similar under-representation of women in randomized trial data of AF ablation (Table 1). A meta-analysis of all AF ablation clinical trials reported that women constitute only one-fifth of the study population.31

In addition to disparities in utilization, gender-based differences in efficacy and safety of AF ablation also exist. Women suffered from a higher risk of complications after AF ablation in multiple studies. Patel et al. reported that women undergoing catheter ablation more often had persistent AF, a higher proportion of non-pulmonary vein triggers, lower ablation success rates, and significantly higher complication rates, the latter driven primarily by vascular complications.32 In a nationwide analysis of AF ablation complications, overall, women had higher in-hospital complication rates than men (7.51 % versus 5.49 %; p<0.001).33 A more recent study reported that women undergoing AF ablation had a higher risk of vascular-related complications, hemorrhage, and perforation or tamponade, and that overall, women had an increased risk of all-cause hospitalization compared with men (9.4 % versus 8.6 %; p=0.07).34

Various patient-related factors could explain the higher rates of vascular and hemorrhagic complications in women. Female patients tend to have smaller vessel calibers compared with men, which may increase the risk of vascular injury. In AF ablation studies, women have been shown to have higher activated partial thromboplastin times compared with men, even when lower doses of heparin are administered.35 However, although these are interesting hypotheses, the underlying mechanism leading to higher complication rates in women is yet to be deciphered.

Gender Differences in Stroke Risk

AF is a well-recognized risk factor for stroke. In a retrospective Swedish AF cohort study of 100,802 patients with AF, female gender was an independent risk factor for stroke (HR 1.18; 95 % CI [1.12–1.24]) even after adjusting for multiple confounding variables.36 As described earlier, women with AF tend to have larger left atrial volumes and reduced atrial contractility compared with men, which can increase the risk of atrial thrombi. Elderly postmenopausal women also have higher rates of diastolic dysfunction and elevated systolic blood pressure compared with men, which can lead to accelerated cardiovascular remodeling and endothelial dysfunction that translates into a higher risk of stroke.37

Table 1: Representation of Women in Major Randomized Clinical Trials of AF Ablation

Open in new tab

Table 2: Gender Differences in Stroke Risk in Anticoagulation Trials of AF

Open in new tab

Efficacy of Anticoagulants

For many decades, warfarin was the choice of anticoagulant for stroke prophylaxis in AF. Direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are now available and have been shown to be non-inferior in stroke prevention. Analysis of trial data demonstrates some gender-specific differences in efficacy and risk of bleeding with the use of these medications.

Warfarin

A meta-analysis of five randomized controlled trials of patients with AF reported that warfarin reduces the risk of ischemic stroke by 84 % (95 % CI [55–95 %]) in women compared with 60 % (95 % CI [35–76 %]) in men.38 However, more recent evidence indicates that women have a higher residual stroke risk compared with men receiving oral anticoagulation. In a post hoc analysis of the AFFIRM trial, Sullivan et al. reported that women were at greater risk of ischemic stroke than men despite similar anticoagulation patterns.39 The difference in ischemic stroke risk was primarily related to a higher proportion of women being outside the therapeutic range for warfarin. Time in therapeutic range is recognized as a major factor determining stroke risk in AF patients on warfarin. A recent meta-analysis also reported similar findings, showing that female patients with AF on warfarin had a significantly higher residual risk of stroke and sys­temic thromboembolism than men (OR 1.28; 95 % CI [1.11–1.47]).40

DOACs

Gender-based differences in stroke risk are less obvious in trials of DOACs. A meta-analysis of 71,683 participants included in the ROCKET-AF, Randomized Evaluation of Long-term Anticoagulant Therapy (RE-LY), Apixaban for Reduction in Stroke and Other Thromboembolic Events in AF(ARISTOTLE), and Effective Anticoagulation with Factor Xa Next Generation in AF – Thrombolysis in MI 48 (ENGAGE AF-TIMI 48) trials showed no gender-based differences in stroke or bleeding risk among patients assigned to DOACs.41 In contrast to patients assigned to warfarin, the risk of residual ischemic stroke among those assigned to DOACs did not reveal any gender bias.

In summary, although prior trials of stroke prevention in AF revealed a higher rate of ischemic stroke in women with AF on warfarin, DOACs appear to not suffer from this gender-based difference in efficacy (Table 2).

Conclusion

Multiple studies have shown major gender-based differences in the clinical profile and management of AF. Whether these are related to differences in biology or represent treatment disparities is unknown. This area of cardiac electrophysiology deserves further study.

References
  1. Wolf PA, Dawber TR, Thomas HE Jr, Kannel WB. Epidemiologic assessment of chronic atrial fibrillation and risk of stroke: the Framingham study. Neurology 1978;28:973–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  2. Magnussen C, Niiranen TJ, Ojeda FM, et al. Sex differences and similarities in atrial fibrillation epidemiology, risk factors, and mortality in community cohorts: results from the BiomarCaRE Consortium (Biomarker for Cardiovascular Risk Assessment in Europe). Circulation 2017;136:1588–97.
    Crossref | PubMed
  3. Bidoggia H, Maciel JP, Capalozza N, et al. Sex differences on the electrocardiographic pattern of cardiac repolarization: possible role of testosterone. Am Heart J 2000;140:678–83.
    Crossref
  4. Wolbrette D, Naccarelli G, Curtis A, et al. Gender differences in arrhythmias. Clin Cardiol 2002;25:49–56.
    Crossref | PubMed
  5. Ambrosi CM, Yamada KA, Nerbonne JM, Efimov IR. Gender differences in electrophysiological gene expression in failing and non-failing human hearts. PLoS One 2013;8:e54635.
    Crossref | PubMed
  6. Pothineni NV, Shirazi LF, Mehta JL. Gender differences in autonomic control of the cardiovascular system. Curr Pharm Des 2016;22:3829–34.
    Crossref | PubMed
  7. Li Z, Wang Z, Yin Z, et al. Gender differences in fibrosis remodeling in patients with long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation. Oncotarget 2017;8:53714–29.
    Crossref
  8. Cochet H, Mouries A, Nivet H, et al. Age, atrial fibrillation, and structural heart disease are the main determinants of left atrial fibrosis detected by delayed-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in a general cardiology population. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2015;26:484–92.
    Crossref | PubMed
  9. Proietti M, Raparelli V, Basili S, et al. Relation of female sex to left atrial diameter and cardiovascular death in atrial fibrillation: The AFFIRM Trial. Int J Cardiol 2016;207:258–63.
    Crossref | PubMed
  10. Piccini JP, Simon DN, Steinberg BA, et al. Differences in clinical and functional outcomes of atrial fibrillation in women and men: two-year results from the ORBIT-AF registry. JAMA Cardiol 2016;1:282–91.
    Crossref | PubMed
  11. Lip GY, Laroche C, Boriani G, et al. Sex-related differences in presentation, treatment, and outcome of patients with atrial fibrillation in Europe: a report from the Euro Observational Research Programme Pilot survey on Atrial Fibrillation. Europace 2015;17:24–31.
    Crossref | PubMed
  12. Schnabel RB, Pecen L, Ojeda FM, et al. Gender differences in clinical presentation and 1-year outcomes in atrial fibrillation. Heart 2017;103:1024–30.
    Crossref | PubMed
  13. Emdin CA, Wong CX, Hsiao AJ, et al. Atrial fibrillation as risk factor for cardiovascular disease and death in women compared with men: systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. BMJ 2016;532:h7013.
    Crossref | PubMed
  14. Washam JB, Stevens SR, Lokhnygina Y, et al. Digoxin use in patients with atrial fibrillation and adverse cardiovascular outcomes: a retrospective analysis of the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF). Lancet 2015;385:2363–70.
    Crossref
  15. Turakhia MP, Santangeli P, Winkelmayer WC, et al. Increased mortality associated with digoxin in contemporary patients with atrial fibrillation: findings from the TREAT-AF study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;64:660–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  16. Rochlani YM, Shah NN, Pothineni NV, Paydak H. Utilization and predictors of electrical cardioversion in patients hospitalized for atrial fibrillation. Cardiol Res Pract 2016;2016:8956020.
    Crossref | PubMed
  17. Gurevitz OT, Varadachari CJ, Ammash NM, et al. The effect of patient sex on recurrence of atrial fibrillation following successful direct current cardioversion. Am Heart J 2006;152:155.e9–13.
    Crossref | PubMed
  18. Essebag V, Reynolds MR, Hadjis T, et al. Sex differences in the relationship between amiodarone use and the need for permanent pacing in patients with atrial fibrillation. Arch Intern Med 2007;167:1648–53.
    Crossref | PubMed
  19. Takigawa M, Kuwahara T, Takahashi A, et al. Differences in catheter ablation of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation between males and females. Int J Cardiol 2013;168:1984–91.
    Crossref | PubMed
  20. Patel N, Deshmukh A, Thakkar B, et al. Gender, race, and health insurance status in patients undergoing catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation. Am J Cardiol 2016;117:1117–26.
    Crossref | PubMed
  21. Bhave PD, Lu X, Girotra S, et al. Race- and sex-related differences in care for patients newly diagnosed with atrial fibrillation. Heart Rhythm 2015;12:1406–12.
    Crossref | PubMed
  22. Stabile G, Bertaglia E, Senatore G, et al. Feasibility of pulmonary vein ostia radiofrequency ablation in patients with atrial fibrillation: a multicenter study (CACAF pilot study). Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2003;26:284–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  23. Wazni OM, Marrouche NF, Martin DO, et al. Radiofrequency ablation vs antiarrhythmic drugs as first-line treatment of symptomatic atrial fibrillation: a randomized trial. JAMA 2005;293:2634–40.
    Crossref | PubMed
  24. Oral H, Pappone C, Chugh A, et al. Circumferential pulmonary-vein ablation for chronic atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2006;354:934–41.
    Crossref | PubMed
  25. Pappone C, Augello G, Sala S, et al. A randomized trial of circumferential pulmonary vein ablation versus antiarrhythmic drug therapy in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: the APAF Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;48:2340–7.
    Crossref | PubMed
  26. Jaïs P, Cauchemez B, Macle L, et al. Catheter ablation versus antiarrhythmic drugs for atrial fibrillation: the A4 study. Circulation 2008;118:2498–505.
    Crossref | PubMed
  27. Forleo GB, Mantica M, De Luca L, et al. Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients with diabetes mellitus type 2: results from a randomized study comparing pulmonary vein isolation versus antiarrhythmic drug therapy. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2009;20:22–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  28. Wilber DJ, Pappone C, Neuzil P, et al. Comparison of antiarrhythmic drug therapy and radiofrequency catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2010;303:333–40.
    Crossref | PubMed
  29. Nielsen JC, Johannessen A, Raatikainen P, et al. Long-term efficacy of catheter ablation as first-line therapy for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: 5-year outcome in a randomised clinical trial. Heart 2017;103:368–76.
    Crossref | PubMed
  30. Packer DL, Kowal RC, Wheelan KR, et al. Cryoballoon ablation of pulmonary veins for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation: first results of the North American Arctic Front (STOP AF) pivotal trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;61:1713–23.
    Crossref | PubMed
  31. Vallakati A, Reddy M, Sharma A, et al. Impact of gender on outcomes after atrial fibrillation ablation. Int J Cardiol 2015;187:12–6.
    Crossref | PubMed
  32. Patel D, Mohanty P, Di Biase L, et al. Outcomes and complications of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation in females. Heart Rhythm 2010;7:167–72.
    Crossref | PubMed
  33. Deshmukh A, Patel NJ, Pant S, et al. In-hospital complications associated with catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation in the United States between 2000 and 2010: analysis of 93 801 procedures. Circulation 2013;128:2104–12.
    Crossref | PubMed
  34. Kaiser DW, Fan J, Schmitt S, et al. Gender differences in clinical outcomes after catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation. JACC Clin Electrophysiol 2016;2:703–10.
    Crossref
  35. Winkle RA, Mead RH, Engel G, Patrawala RA. Safety of lower activated clotting times during atrial fibrillation ablation using open irrigated tip catheters and a single transseptal puncture. Am J Cardiol 2011;107:704–8.
    Crossref | PubMed
  36. Friberg L, Benson L, Rosenqvist M, Lip GY. Assessment of female sex as a risk factor in atrial fibrillation in Sweden: nationwide retrospective cohort study. BMJ 2012;344:e3522.
    Crossref | PubMed
  37. Cove CL, Albert CM, Andreotti F, et al. Female sex as an independent risk factor for stroke in atrial fibrillation: possible mechanisms. Thromb Haemost 2014;111:385–91.
    Crossref | PubMed
  38. Atrial Fibrillation Investigators. Risk factors for stroke and efficacy of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation. Analysis of pooled data from five randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med 1994;154:1449–57.
    Crossref | PubMed
  39. Sullivan RM, Zhang J, Zamba G, et al. Relation of gender-specific risk of ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation to differences in warfarin anticoagulation control (from AFFIRM). Am J Cardiol 2012;110:1799–802.
    Crossref | PubMed
  40. Pancholy SB, Sharma PS, Pancholy DS, et al. Meta-analysis of gender differences in residual stroke risk and major bleeding in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation treated with oral anticoagulants. Am J Cardiol 2014;113:485–90.
    Crossref | PubMed
  41. Ruff CT, Giugliano RP, Braunwald E, et al. Comparison of the efficacy and safety of new oral anticoagulants with warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet 2014;383:955–62.
    Crossref
  42. Hart RG, Pearce LA, McBride R, et al. Factors associated with ischemic stroke during aspirin therapy in atrial fibrillation: analysis of 2012 participants in the SPAF I-III Clinical Trials. Stroke 1999;30:1223–9.
    PubMed
  43. Fang MC, Singer DE, Chang Y, et al. Gender differences in the risk of ischemic stroke and peripheral embolism in atrial fibrillation: the AnTicoagulation and Risk factors in Atrial fibrillation (ATRIA) study. Circulation 2005;112:1687–91.
    Crossref | PubMed
  44. Rienstra M, Van Veldhuisen DJ, Hagens VE, et al. Gender-related differences in rhythm control treatment in persistent atrial fibrillation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;46:1298–1306.
    Crossref | PubMed
  45. Gomberg-Maitland M, Wenger NK, Feyzi J, et al. Anticoagulation in women with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in the stroke prevention using an oral thrombin inhibitor (SPORTIF) trials. Eur Heart J 2006;27:1947–53.
    Crossref | PubMed
  46. Connolly SJ, Ezekowitz MD, Yusuf S, et al. Dabigatran versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1139–51.
    Crossref | PubMed
  47. Connolly SJ, Eikelboom J, Joyner C, et al. Apixaban in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2011;364:806–17.
    Crossref | PubMed
  48. Patel MR, Mahaffey KW, Garg J, et al. Rivaroxaban versus warfarin in nonvalvular atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2011;365:883–91.
    Crossref | PubMed
  49. Granger CB, Alexander JH, McMurray JJ, et al. Apixaban versus warfarin in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2011;365:981–92.
    Crossref | PubMed
  50. Giugliano RP, O’Donoghue ML, Ruff CT, et al. Efficacy and safety outcomes in 8040 women compared with 13,085 men with atrial fibrillation treated with Edoxaban vs Warfarin for an average 2.8 years. J Atrial Fibrillation 2017. Available at: http://jafib.com/va_abstract_2015.php?view=full&id=330 (accessed 13 February 2018)