Background: Microvascular angina is a common clinical entity, with about a three-fold higher frequency in women. The pathogenesis of microvascular angina has not been much studied, but inflammation and endothelial dysfunction have been incriminated as the main mechanisms of this disease. Methoss: Our purpose was to analyze whether certain inflammatory markers, i.e., interleukin 6 (IL-6) and endothelin 1 (ET-1), can play a role in the diagnosis of microvascular angina in women. Results: Ninety women with ischemic heart disease were divided into two groups, based on their affliction with either microvascular or macrovascular disease. In general, the levels of IL6 and ET1 were similar between the two groups. Analyzing these marker levels according to the number of coronary lesions, we obtained an increased IL6 value that was similar for patients with microvascular angina, one-vessel, and two-vessel coronary disease, but significantly lower than in women with three-vessel coronary lesions. Also, in microvascular angina, IL6 level was correlated with the NYHA IV functional class. Unexpectedly, the level of ET1 was correlated with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Conclusions: In women with an increased suspicion of microvascular angina, in whom microvascular dysfunction cannot be tested invasively, IL-6 level, unlike the ET-1 level, might be considered a diagnostic marker of this disease.

Background and Objectives: Revascularization has been proven to be superior to medication for symptom improvement in patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD). There are well known gender differences in therapeutic strategies for PAD. The influence of gender on post-angioplasty prognosis is not fully understood though. The present study aims to identify potential peculiarities between men and women undergoing peripheral angioplasty, as well as factors responsible for those differences. Material and methods: 104 consecutive subjects (50 women and 54 men) who underwent percutaneous angioplasty (PTA) between January and October 2019 for symptomatic PAD were included. Demographics, PAD history, cardiovascular risk factors, comorbidities, the associated coronary or cerebrovascular diseases, biological parameters, drug-treatment and PTA type and technique were taken into account. The follow-up period was 2 years, during which major adverse limb events (MALE) were documented. Results: The mean age was 67 ± 10 years. Women were 4 years older than the men (69 ± 10 years vs. 65 ± 9.2 years—p = 0.04). Smoking was more prevalent in men (p = 0.0004), while other cardiovascular risk factors did not differ significantly. The mean follow-up of the two groups was 21 ± 2.4 months. Women had infra-inguinal involvement more frequently (78%), while men exhibited mixed disease, with supra + infra-inguinal (37%) or solely supra-inguinal (20.3%) involvement (p = 0.0012). Rates of MALE were similar in the two groups (p = 0.914). Gender did not influence the incidence of PAD-related adverse events. The only parameter that proved to have a significant influence on the occurrence of MALE was the ankle–brachial index (ABI). A value below 0.5 was found to be an independent predictor for MALE (p = 0.001). Conclusions: There was no significant difference in the incidence rates of MALE between the two genders over a 2-year follow-up period post-PTA. Regardless of sex, an ankle–brachial index value below 0.5 was the sole independent predictor for limb-related adverse events.

Left bundle branch block is not a benign pathology, and its presence requires the identification of a pathological substrate, such as ischemic heart disease. Left bundle branch block appears to be more commonly associated with normal coronary arteries, especially in women. The objectives of our study were to describe the particularities of left bundle branch block in women compared to men with ischemic heart disease. Result: We included seventy patients with left bundle branch block and ischemic heart disease, with a mean age of 67.01 ± 8.89 years. There were no differences in the profile of risk factors, except for smoking and uric acid. The ventricular depolarization (QRS) duration was longer in men than women (136.86 ± 8.32 vs. 132.57 ± 9.19 msec; p = 0.018) and also men were observed to have larger left ventricular diameters. Left bundle branch block duration was directly associated with ventricular diameters and indirectly associated with left ventricular ejection fraction value, especially in women (R = −0.52, p = 0.0012 vs. R = −0.50, p = 0.002). In angiography, 80% of women had normal epicardial arteries compared with 65.7% of men; all these patients presented with microvascular dysfunction. Conclusion: The differences between the sexes were not so obvious in terms of the presence of risk factors; instead, there were differences in electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, and angiographic aspects. Left bundle branch block appears to be a marker of microvascular angina and systolic dysfunction, especially in women.

Anomalous left coronary artery from the pulmonary artery (ALCAPA) syndrome is a rare congenital coronary anomaly, which can cause potentially fatal complications, such as heart failure, myocardial infarction and sudden cardiac death. Only a few patients left untreated survive to adulthood. We highlight the importance of multimodal imaging in the diagnosis of ALCAPA syndrome in a young asymptomatic female patient with inducible ischemia on exercise. The patient was successfully treated with surgery

Background: Atrial fibrillation is more common in men, but in the presence of ischemic heart disease, this arrhythmia is more frequent in women. However, like in coronary heart disease, women with atrial fibrillation are suboptimally treated. Methods: To identify particularities of ablation, in women with atrial fibrillation and ischemic heart disease. Results: 29 women and 26 men, with documented ischemic heart disease and atrial fibrillation, who underwent catheter ablation, were admitted in the study. No significant differences were registered regarding the heart rate control treatment. Electrical cardioversion was significantly higher in men, while pharmacological cardioversion was predominantly recommended in women. The ablation was performed later in women, after 2.55 ± 1.84 years versus 1.80 ± 1.05 in men (p = 0.05). The time elapsed until the ablation was performed was statistically correlated with atypical symptomatology and with the number of antiarrhythmics used prior to the ablation. There were no significant differences for the relapse of atrial fibrillation at 3 months. Quality of life at 3 months after ablation was increased in both groups. Conclusion: Catheter ablation is performed much later in women, and the causes responsible for this delay would be more atypical symptoms and a greater number of antiarrhythmics tried before the ablation.

Sports cardiologists frequently face the challenge of distinguishing physiological cardiac adaptation to intensive training (“athlete’s heart”) from early or mild cardiac pathology, a dilemma in which both false-positive and false-negative assessments carry meaningful consequences for the athlete. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) provides a dynamic, functional complement to structural and electrical assessment, but its value in this specific differential-diagnosis context has not been comprehensively synthesized. This narrative review examines current evidence on CPET in distinguishing athlete’s heart from hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, dilated cardiomyopathy, arrhythmogenic cardiomyopathy, and thoracic wall deformities such as pectus excavatum, alongside the physiological basis of high exercise capacity in athletes and the athlete-specific reference values now becoming available. Across conditions, peak oxygen uptake alone proved an unreliable discriminator. Ventilatory efficiency, oxygen-pulse kinetics, and the exercise arrhythmic and blood-pressure response appear to carry additional information when interpreted within a multiparametric framework, although the supporting studies are observational, mostly single-centre, and were not designed to compare these variables against one another. Special populations, including veteran athletes, women, and those with congenital heart disease, require dedicated reference data that remain incomplete, and emerging artificial-intelligence-based interpretive tools require athlete-specific validation before clinical adoption. A practical, stepwise diagnostic framework integrating CPET with imaging and shared decision-making is proposed. It reflects the authors’ synthesis of the reviewed evidence rather than a prospectively validated or society-endorsed pathway. Closing the evidence gaps identified here, particularly for underrepresented athlete populations and prospective outcomes data, should be a priority for future research in sports cardiology.