RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Guidelines on dyslipidemia and lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) over the years recommend lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals by more intense therapy. Nevertheless, LDL­C has increased in the general population. Real-world trends of LLT medication as well as of LDL­C levels in cardiovascular high-risk patients are unclear. METHODS: From 2158 patients who were referred for elective coronary angiography, lipid medication was analyzed at admission in three cardiovascular observational studies (OS) over the last 25 years: OS1: 1999-2000, OS2: 2005-2008 and OS3: 2022-2023. The three studies were performed at the same cardiology unit of a tertiary care hospital in Austria. RESULTS: The proportion of patients without LLT significantly decreased from OS1 through OS2 to OS3 (49.4%, 45.6%, and 18.5%, respectively, ptrend < 0.001). Moreover, the percentage of patients under high-intensity statin treatment significantly increased from 0% to 5.1%, and 56.5% (ptrend < 0.001). Significantly more patients became treated by more than one compound (OS1: 1.8%, OS2: 1.6%, OS3: 31.2%; ptrend < 0.001). In the latest OS3, a trend to fixed-dose combination of statins with ezetimibe was observed. Mean LDL­C levels decreased from 129 mg/dL over 127 mg/dL to 83 mg/dL, respectively (ptrend < 0.001). Of the patients on high-intensity therapy 34% met the recent ESC/EAS goals (LDL-C < 55 mg/dL), but only 3% on non-intense therapy. CONCLUSION: We conclude that during the observational period of a quarter of a century, treatment intensity increased and LDL­C levels improved considerably. Guidelines apparently matter in this high-risk population and are considered by primary care physicians.

RESUMEN

The aim of this retrospective study was to provide real-world data on lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) implementation and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target achievement in an ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) population, with a focus on very-high-risk patients according to European guidelines criteria. METHODS: Included were all STEMI patients with available LDL-C and total cholesterol treated at a large tertiary center in Salzburg, Austria, 2018-2020 (n = 910), with stratification into very-high-risk cohorts. Analysis was descriptive, with variables reported as number, percentages, median, and interquartile range. RESULTS: Among patients with prior LLT use, statin monotherapy predominated, 5.3% were using high-intensity statins, 1.2% were using combined ezetimibe therapy, and none were taking PCSK9 inhibitors at the time of STEMI. In very-high-risk secondary prevention cohorts, LLT optimization was alarmingly low: 8-22% of patients were taking high-intensity statins, just 0-6% combined with ezetimibe. Depending on the very-high-risk cohort, 27-45% of secondary prevention patients and 58-73% of primary prevention patients were not taking any LLTs, although 19-60% were actively taking/prescribed medications for hypertension and/or diabetes mellitus. Corresponding LDL-C target achievement in all very-high-risk cohorts was poor: <22% of patients had LDL-C values < 55 mg/dL at the time of STEMI. CONCLUSION: Severe shortcomings in LLT implementation and optimization, and LDL-C target achievement, were observed in the total STEMI population and across all very-high-risk cohorts, attributable in part to deficits in care delivery.

RESUMEN

Background: The impact of the stepwise implementation of the 2019 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) treatment algorithm on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal attainment was simulated in patients from the DA VINCI study. Methods: Monte Carlo simulation was used to evaluate treatment optimisation scenarios, based on a patient's risk category: statin intensification (step 1), addition of ezetimibe (step 2), and addition of a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor (step 3). Residual cardiovascular risk and predicted relative and absolute risk reduction (RRR and ARR) in cardiovascular events were assessed. Findings: In DA VINCI, 2482 patients did not achieve their 2019 ESC/EAS LDL-C goals and were included in the simulation. In patients without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) (n = 962), 27.0% (n = 259) and 57.0% (n = 548) are likely to achieve their LDL-C goals at step 1 and step 2, respectively. Of those at very high risk without ASCVD (n = 74), 88.1% (n = 65) are likely to achieve their LDL-C goals at step 3. In patients with ASCVD (n = 1520), 12.0% (n = 183), 42.1% (n = 641) and 93.2% (n = 1416) are likely to achieve their LDL-C goals at steps 1, 2 and 3, respectively. In patients with and without ASCVD, treatment optimisation may result in mean simulated RRR of 24.0% and 17.7%, respectively, and ARR of 8.1% and 2.6%, respectively. Interpretation: Most patients at high cardiovascular risk are unlikely to achieve LDL-C goals through statin optimisation and ezetimibe, and will require a PCSK9 inhibitor, leading to greater reduction in cardiovascular risk. Funding: Amgen.

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate LDL-C control in patients within 6 months after hospitalization for ACS in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: This multicenter, prospective, observational registry evaluates LDL-C control in patients within 6 months after hospitalization for ACS in Saudi Arabia between December 2017 and October 2019. The study aimed at recruiting 170 patients and data were collected retrospectively at baseline and prospectively at 2 subsequent visits. RESULTS: 201 patients were included at baseline, 193 completed the 3-month visit and 186 completed the 6-month visit. Post-ACS, virtually all patients were prescribed high-intensity statins and LDL-C levels decreased consistently. However, at LDL-C target assessment, 57.1% of patients still had LDL-C levels >55 mg/dL, while 62.6% of patients had achieved LDL-C level decrease >50%. The composite milestone of LDL-C decrease >50% and LDL-C levels <55 mg/dL was met by 20.6% of study patients. Importantly, 37% of patients did not have LDL-C reading post-ACS and the primary outcome was only valuable for 126 out of 201 patients (63%). CONCLUSION: Levels and decrease of LDL-C from baseline achieved in this study are suboptimal, according to updated 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines. While statins were prescribed to all patients post-ACS, the recommended add-on treatments were largely overlooked. Gaps in dyslipidemia management linger, despite clear updated guidelines.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a common inherited disorder of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) catabolism that causes elevated LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) and premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Despite the availability of effective treatments, FH remains underdiagnosed and undertreated. The aims of the study were to identify putative FH subjects using data from laboratory and cardiology databases, genetically characterize suspected FH patients referred to the Lipid Clinic and monitor attainment of treatment goals in identified patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrieved the electronic health records of 221,644 individuals referred to laboratory for routine assessment and of 583 ASCVD patients (age ≤65) who underwent percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA). We monitored the lipid profiles of subjects with LDL-C ≥ 250 mg/dl identified by laboratory survey (LS-P), PTCA patients and patients from the Lipid Clinic (LC-P). The laboratory survey identified 1.46% of subjects with LDL-C ≥ 190 mg/dl and 0.08% with LDL-C ≥ 250 mg/dl. Probable/definite FH was suspected in 3% of PTCA patients. Molecularly-confirmed FH was found in 44% of LC-P subjects. Five new LDLR mutations were identified. The 50% LDL-C reduction target was achieved by 70.6% of LC-P patients. Only 18.5% of PTCA patients reached the LDL-C < 55 mg/dl target. CONCLUSION: By using a combined approach based on laboratory lipid profiles, documented ASCVD and Lipid Clinic data, we were able to identify subjects with a high probability of being FH. Attainment of LDL-C goals was largely suboptimal. Efforts are needed to improve FH detection and achievement of lipid targets.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

B a c k g r o u n d: Cardiovascular diseases are the first cause of death globally. Hypercholester- olemia is the most important factor responsible for atherosclerotic plaque formation and increasing cardiovascular risk. Reduction of LDL-C level is the most relevant goal for reduction of cardiovascular risk. A i m s: Real life adherence to guidelines concerning statin therapy in one center study population. M e t h o d s: We analyzed data collected in the Department of Internal Diseases from September 2019 to February 2020, obtained from 238 patients hospitalized in this time period. We assessed application of the new 2019 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the Management of Dyslipidaemias in daily clinical practice and compared effectiveness of LLT according to 2016 and 2019 guidelines. R e s u l t s: Only 1 in 5 patients with dyslipideamia achieve the 2019 ESC/EAS guideline-recommended levels of LDL-C with relation to their TCVR. We noticed that 20 of patients who did not achieve proper 2019 LDL level, meet new therapy targets established in year 2016. We observed that higher patient TCVR resulted in better compliance with guidelines and ordination of proper LLT. Most patients were on monotherapy with statins. C o n c l u s i o n s: It could be beneficial to start treatment with double or even triple therapy especially in group with the highest LDL-C levels.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIMS: To estimate the proportion of patients with a recent myocardial infarction (MI) who would be eligible for additional lipid-lowering therapy according to the 2019 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias, and to simulate the effects of expanded lipid-lowering therapy on attainment of the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target as recommended by the guidelines. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using the nationwide SWEDEHEART register, we included 25 466 patients who had attended a follow-up visit 6-10 weeks after an MI event, 2013-17. While most patients (86.6%) were receiving high-intensity statins, 82.9% of the patients would be eligible for expanded lipid-lowering therapy, as they had not attained the target of an LDL-C level of <1.4 mmol and a ≥50% LDL-C level reduction. When maximized use of high-intensity statins followed by add-on therapy with ezetimibe was simulated using a Monte Carlo model, the LDL-C target was reached in 19.9% using high-intensity statin monotherapy and in another 28.5% with high-intensity statins and ezetimibe, while 50.7% would still be eligible for proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors. When use of alirocumab or evolocumab was simulated in those who were eligible for PCSK9 inhibitors, around 90% of all patients attained the LDL-C target. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that, even with maximized use of high-intensity statins and ezetimibe, around half of patients with MI would be eligible for treatment with PCSK9 inhibitors according to the 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines. Considering the current cost of PCSK9 inhibitors, the financial implications of the new guidelines may be substantial.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Prior studies conducted in Greece consistently indicate that dyslipidemia is suboptimally managed, while the burden of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and related risk factors is rising. METHODS: CHALLENGE was a multicenter, cross-sectional study carried out following the publication of guidelines advocating stricter low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets. It primarily aimed to depict LDL-C target attainment, and to assess the cardiovascular risk status and quality of life (QoL) of patients treated in a primary or secondary CVD prevention setting who had received any medical intervention for cardiovascular risk modification within 6months of enrollment. RESULTS: Between December 2012 and April 2013, 500 patients (55% males) aged (mean±SD) 62.0±11.7years, participated in the study. Cardiovascular risk according to the 2011 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines was 'very high', 'high', and 'moderate' in 61.2%, 23.4%, and 15.4%, respectively. Overall, 92.0% of patients were on lipid-lowering treatment, yet only 23.3% had attained their ESC/EAS-defined LDL-C target. LDL-C target attainment was more likely among 'moderate' versus 'very high' cardiovascular risk patients (odds ratio: 4.04; 95% confidence interval: 2.32-7.06; p<0.001). QoL improved as cardiovascular risk decreased (EQ-VAS 71.8±16.2 in the 'very high' versus 78.3±15.1 and 80.3±15.7 in the 'high' and 'moderate' risk groups; p<0.001). Time constraints and difficulties in implementation in daily practice were the investigator's main barriers for guideline utilization. CONCLUSIONS: During contemporary management of dyslipidemia in Greece, LDL-C target attainment is suboptimal. There is an undoubted need for improvement and implementation of cardiovascular risk assessment in routine clinical practice.

Asunto(s)