Background Stroke is a serious complication of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP), with potentially severe and long‐term sequelae. However, the temporal trends, predictors, and outcomes of stroke in women with HDP at delivery remain unknown. Methods and Results All HDP delivery hospitalizations with or without stroke event (ischemic, hemorrhagic, or unspecified) between 2004 and 2014 in the United States National Inpatient Sample were analyzed to examine incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of stroke. Of 4 240 284 HDP delivery hospitalizations, 3391 (0.08%) women had stroke. While the prevalence of HDP increased over time, incident stroke rates decreased from 10 to 6 per 10 000 HDP delivery hospitalizations between 2004 and 2014. Women with stroke were increasingly multimorbid, with some risk factors being more strongly associated with ischemic strokes, including congenital heart disease, peripheral vascular disease, dyslipidemia, and sickle cell disease. Delivery complications were also associated with stroke, including cesarean section (odds ratio [OR], 1.58; 95% CI, 1.33–1.86), postpartum hemorrhage (OR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.33–1.86), and maternal mortality (OR, 99.78; 95% CI, 59.15–168.31), independently of potential confounders. Women with stroke had longer hospital stays (median, 6 versus 3 days), higher hospital charges (median, $14 655 versus $4762), and a higher proportion of nonroutine discharge locations (38% versus 4%). Conclusions The incidence of stroke in women with HDP has declined over time. While a relatively rare event, identification of women at highest risk of ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke on admission for delivery is important to reduce long‐term sequelae.

The potential benefit of fish oil (omega-3 fatty acids) consumption to reduce cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk remains controversial. Some investigations report reduced CVD risk associated with fish or fish oil consumption while others report no benefit. This controversy is in part resolved when consideration is given to omega-3 blood levels in relation to CVD risk as well as blood levels achieved in clinical trials of omega-3 supplementation and CVD benefit. There is a wide variation in omega-3 blood levels achieved between individuals in response to a given dose of an omega-3 supplement. Many studies tested a daily dose of 1 gram omega-3 supplementation. The individual variation in blood omega-3 levels achieved in response to a fixed daily dose helps to explain why some individuals may obtain CVD protection benefit while others do not due to failure to achieve a therapeutic threshold. Recent development of a population range in a United States population helps to provide clinical guidance since population omega-3 blood level ranges may vary due to environmental and genetic reasons. Omega-3 supplementation may also be of benefit in reducing the adverse impact of air pollution on CVD risk.

Heart Centers for Women (HCW) developed as a response to the need for improved outcomes for women with cardiovascular disease (CVD). From 1984 until 2012, more women died of CVD every single year in comparison with men. Initially, there was limited awareness and sex-specific research regarding mortality or outcomes in women. HCW played an active role in addressing these disparities, provided focused care for women, and contributed to improvements in these gaps. In 2014 and 2015, death from CVD in women had declined below the level of death from CVD in comparison with men. Even though awareness of CVD in women has increased among the public and healthcare providers and both sex- and gender-specific research is currently required in all research trials, not all women have benefitted equally in mortality reduction. New strategies for HCW need to be developed to address these disparities and expand the current HCW model. The HCW care team needs to direct academic curricula on sex- and gender-specific research and care; expand to include other healthcare professionals and other subspecialties; provide new care models; address diversity; and include more male providers.

Background: Approximately 20% of the population has elevated circulating levels of lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]), one of the most robust predictors of cardiovascular disease risk. This is particularly true for women. Hypothesis: Many female patients with "normal" traditional risk factors or low atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk scores may harbor high risk related to elevated levels of Lp(a). Methods: A retrospective, cross-sectional study of consecutive female patients presenting to Heart Centers for Women was performed. Discordance between low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and Lp(a) was determined. The ASCVD risk and Reynolds Risk Score models A (RRS-A) and B (RRS-B) were calculated, and level of agreement in patients meeting treatment threshold (≥7.5% for ASCVD, ≥10% for RRS-A and RRS-B) were compared. Results: Among 713 women, 290 (41%) had elevated Lp(a); however, LDL-C and Lp(a) were weakly correlated (r = 0.08). Significant discordance was observed between abnormal LDL-C and Lp(a) levels (McNemar P = 0.03). There was moderate correlation between RRS-A and ASCVD risk (r = 0.71, P < 0.001), and Bland-Altman plot showed diminished correlation with increased risk. More patients met treatment threshold by ASCVD risk estimation, but nearly 1 out of 20 patients met treatment threshold by RRS-A but not ASCVD score. Conclusions: There is high prevalence of elevated Lp(a) among women presenting to Heart Centers for Women. Although traditional risk markers such as elevated LDL-C or high ASCVD risk may be absent in some women, elevated Lp(a) may identify patients who may benefit from aggressive risk-factor modification and pharmacologic therapy.

Hypertension, a prevalent condition in the United States and in the developed world, is a significant risk factor associated with aortic aneurysms. This case study describes a 7.3cm Transverse Aortic Arch Aneurysm identified in a 56-year-old female with a history of smoking and essential hypertension. The size, location, age of the patient, and the fact that this aneurysm was an incidental finding make this case novel. The size of this aneurysm and its ability to remain undetected for such an extended period of time was remarkable, but not unusual for this disease process. Based on current guidelines, this patient was not an appropriate candidate for screening via aortic imaging.