RESUMEN
In patients at high cardiovascular risk, a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction of ≥50% from baseline and an LDL-C goal of <70 mg/dL (or <55 mg/dL in very high-risk patients) are recommended. Multiple registry and retrospective studies have shown that patients with high atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk often do not reach the targets defined by the European Society of Cardiology guidelines as a result of suboptimal management of LDL-C. Here, we report the data on lipid-lowering therapy and lipid targets from the Survey on Risk FactOrs and CardiovascuLar secondary prEvention and drug strategieS (SOFOCLES), an observational, prospective study designed to collect data on patients with ischemic heart disease treated at cardiac outpatient clinics across the Italian national territory. We included patients with known coronary heart disease (CHD) who underwent follow-up visits at various outpatient cardiology clinics. A total of 2532 patients were included (mean age: 67±17 years, 80% male). Among patients with available laboratory data (n=1712), 995 (58%) had LDL-C<70 mg/dL, 717 (42%) had LDL-C≥70 mg/dL, and 470 (27%) had LDL-C<55 mg/dL. Patients who more frequently achieved the recommended LDL-C levels were male, had diabetes, had a higher educational level, and performed intense physical activity. Statins were used in 2339 (92%) patients, high-intensity statins (e.g., rosuvastatin 20/40 mg or atorvastatin 40/80 mg) in 1547 patients (61% of the whole population and 66% of patients on statins), and ezetimibe in 891 patients (35%). Patients receiving high-intensity statins tended to be younger, not to have diabetes, and to have been included in a cardiac rehabilitation program. In a real-world sample of Italian patients with CHD, adherence to lipid-lowering therapy fell markedly short of optimal levels. Many patients did not achieve the LDL-C target of 70 mg/dL, and even fewer reached the LDL-C target of 55 mg/dL. Notably, patients with a lower educational level had a greater likelihood of being undertreated. Strategies aimed at improving preventive interventions for CHD and overcoming social disparities should be evaluated and optimized.
RESUMEN
We report the case of an incidental finding of a huge aneurysm of the ascending aorta with a congenital bicuspid aortic valve type 0-lateral. This severe condition was totally unknown to the patient, who was asymptomatic for cardiovascular disease. The aneurysmal mass involved the entire mediastinum, altering the normal anatomical relations, so the operative strategy was modified intraoperatively, tailoring the surgical technique to the anatomical conditions found. Despite a delayed awakening, the patient had an uncomplicated postoperative course. Therefore, this case highlights the importance of not underestimating nonspecific, seemingly harmless symptoms and signs that may reveal potentially catastrophic pathologies, while also focusing on the surgical technique used. The modified Cabrol procedure, while an underutilized technique, if present in the cardiac surgeon's "arsenal," can represent a life-saving strategy in complex cases requiring an aortic valve and ascending aorta replacement.
RESUMEN
AIMS: Using data from the nationwide prospective START registry that enrolled a large cohort of patients with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS), we aimed to investigate whether the presence of diabetes mellitus (DM) and pre-DM independently affected the risk of cardiovascular events at 1-year follow-up. METHODS: We assessed the impact of DM and pre-DM on all-cause mortality and a composite of all-cause mortality and hospitalization for cardiovascular causes at 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: Among the 3,778 patients with available fasting plasma glucose data at study entry, 37% were classified as DM, 25% as pre-DM, and 38% as no DM. At 1 year, patients with DM had higher rates of all-cause death (p = 0.004) and death/cardiovascular hospitalization (p = 0.003) than those with pre-DM or without DM. Conversely, no significant differences in the adverse event rate were found between patients with pre-DM and those without DM. At unadjusted Cox analysis, DM resulted as a predictor of both death for any cause (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.41; 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.34-4.34; p = 0.003) and all-cause death/hospitalization for cardiovascular causes (HR: 1.29; 95% CI: 1.02-1.62; p = 0.03). However, DM did not result as an independent predictor of either endpoint at multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The risk of 1-year major events among patients with CCS and pre-DM is comparable to that of patients with CCS and normoglycemic status and is lower than that of patients with DM.