Multicenter and all-comers validation of a score to select patients for manual thrombectomy, the DDTA score.

BACKGROUND: Routine manual thrombectomy (MT) is not recommended in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (P-PCI) but it is performed in many procedures. The objective of our study was validating the DDTA score, designed for selecting patients who benefit most from MT. METHODS: Observational and multicenter study of all consecutive patients undergoing P-PCI in five institutions. Results were compared with the design cohort and the performance of the DDTA was analyzed in all patients. Primary end-point of the analyses was TIMI 3 after MT; secondary endpoints were final TIMI 3, no-reflow incidence, in-hospital mortality and in-hospital major cardiovascular events (MACE). In-hospital prognosis was assessed by the Zwolle risk score. RESULTS: Three hundred forty patients were included in the validation cohort and no differences were observed as compared to the design cohort (618 patients) except for lower use of MT and higher IIb/IIIa inhibitors or drug-eluting stents. The probability of TIMI 3 after MT decreased as delay to P-PCI was higher. If DDTA score, MT was associated to TIMI 3 after MT (OR: 4.11) and final TIMI 3 (OR: 2.44). There was a linear and continuous relationship between DDTA score and all endpoints. DDTA score ≥ 4 was independently associated to lower no-reflow, in-hospital MACE or mortality. The lowest incidence of in-hospital mortality or MACE was in patients who had DDTA score ≥ 4 and Zwolle risk score 0-3. CONCLUSIONS: MT is associated to higher rate of final TIMI3 in patients with the DDTA score ≥ 4. Patients with DDTA score ≥ 4 had lower no-reflow and in-hospital complications.

[Spanish adaptation of the 2016 European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice]. / Adaptación española de las guías europeas de 2016 sobre prevención de la enfermedad cardiovascular en la práctica clínica.

The VI European Guidelines for Cardiovascular Prevention recommend combining population and high-risk strategies with lifestyle changes as a cornerstone of prevention, and propose the SCORE function to quantify cardiovascular risk. The guidelines highlight disease specific interventions, and conditions as women, young people and ethnic minorities. Screening for subclinical atherosclerosis with noninvasive imaging techniques is not recommended. The guidelines distinguish four risk levels (very high, high, moderate and low) with therapeutic objectives for lipid control according to risk. Diabetes mellitus confers a high risk, except for subjects with type 2 diabetes with less than <10 years of evolution, without other risk factors or complications, or type 1 diabetes of short evolution without complications. The decision to start pharmacological treatment of arterial hypertension will depend on the blood pressure level and the cardiovascular risk, taking into account the lesion of target organs. The guidelines don't recommend antiplatelet drugs in primary prevention because of the increased bleeding risk. The low adherence to the medication requires simplified therapeutic regimes and to identify and combat its causes. The guidelines highlight the responsibility of health professionals to take an active role in advocating evidence-based interventions at the population level, and propose effective interventions, at individual and population level, to promote a healthy diet, the practice of physical activity, the cessation of smoking and the protection against alcohol abuse.

[Spanish adaptation of the 2016 European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice]. / Adaptación española de las guías europeas de 2016 sobre prevención de la enfermedad cardiovascular en la práctica clínica.

The VI European Guidelines for Cardiovascular Prevention recommend combining population and high-risk strategies with lifestyle changes as a cornerstone of prevention, and propose the SCORE function to quantify cardiovascular risk. The guidelines highlight disease specific interventions, and conditions as women, young people and ethnic minorities. Screening for subclinical atherosclerosis with noninvasive imaging techniques is not recommended. The guidelines distinguish four risk levels (very high, high, moderate and low) with therapeutic objectives for lipid control according to risk. Diabetes mellitus confers a high risk, except for subjects with type 2 diabetes with less than <10 years of evolution, without other risk factors or complications, or type 1 diabetes of short evolution without complications. The decision to start pharmacological treatment of arterial hypertension will depend on the blood pressure level and the cardiovascular risk, taking into account the lesion of target organs. The guidelines don't recommend antiplatelet drugs in primary prevention because of the increased bleeding risk. The low adherence to the medication requires simplified therapeutic regimes and to identify and combat its causes. The guidelines highlight the responsibility of health professionals to take an active role in advocating evidence-based interventions at the population level, and propose effective interventions, at individual and population level, to promote a healthy diet, the practice of physical activity, the cessation of smoking and the protection against alcohol abuse.

[Spanish Adaptation of the 2016 European Guidelines on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice]. / Adaptación española de las guías europeas de 2016 sobre prevención de la enfermedad cardiovascular en la práctica clínica.

The VI European Guidelines for Cardiovascular Prevention recommend combining population and high-risk strategies with lifestyle changes as a cornerstone of prevention, and propose the SCORE function to quantify cardiovascular risk. The guidelines highlight disease specific interventions, and conditions as women, young people and ethnic minorities. Screening for subclinical atherosclerosis with noninvasive imaging techniques is not recommended. The guidelines distinguish four risk levels (very high, high, moderate and low) with therapeutic objectives for lipid control according to risk. Diabetes mellitus confers a high risk, except for subjects with type 2 diabetes with less than 10 years of evolution, without other risk factors or complications, or type 1 diabetes of short evolution without complications. The decision to start pharmacological treatment of arterial hypertension will depend on the blood pressure level and the cardiovascular risk, taking into account the lesion of target organs. The guidelines don't recommend antiplatelet drugs in primary prevention because of the increased bleeding risk. The low adherence to the medication requires simplified therapeutic regimes and to identify and combat its causes. The guidelines highlight the responsibility of health professionals to take an active role in advocating evidence-based interventions at the population level, and propose effective interventions, at individual and population level, to promote a healthy diet, the practice of physical activity, the cessation of smoking and the protection against alcohol abuse.

Trends in Risk Factors and Treatments in Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Seen at Cardiology Clinics Between 2006 and 2014.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Chronic ischemic heart disease is the most prevalent of all cardiovascular diseases. Patients are at high risk of complications. In recent decades, changes may have occurred in the clinical characteristics of the disease, its treatment and control of risk factors. METHODS: A direct comparison of 2 national registries of patients with chronic ischemic heart disease carried out in 2006 (n=1583) and 2014 (n=1110). RESULTS: We observed statistically significant differences between the 2 registries, with a higher percentage of men and smokers in the 2014 registry, but a lower prevalence of diabetes mellitus and hypertension. Heart failure and stroke were more prevalent in the 2006 registry. Patients in the 2014 registry had better results for lipid profile, blood glucose, creatinine, and glomerular filtration rate. We observed higher use of recommended drugs for secondary prevention and an increased percentage of patients receiving optimal medical therapy, from 32.5% to 49.5% (P<.01). Use of high-intensity statin doses also increased from 10.5% to 42.8% (P<.01). We found better control of some risk factors (improved dyslipidemia, heart rate, and blood glucose in patients with diabetes) but worse blood pressure control. CONCLUSIONS: The clinical profile of patients with chronic ischemic heart disease is similar in the 2 registries. There has been an improvement in patients' medical therapy and dyslipidemia control, blood glucose, and heart rate, but there is still much room for improvement in the control of other cardiovascular risk factors.

Current practice in identifying and treating cardiovascular risk, with a focus on residual risk associated with atherogenic dyslipidaemia.

A panel of European experts on lipids and cardiovascular disease discussed clinical approaches to managing cardiovascular risk in clinical practice, including residual cardiovascular risk associated with lipid abnormalities, such as atherogenic dyslipidaemia (AD). A simplified definition of AD was proposed to enhance understanding of this condition, its prevalence, and its impact on cardiovascular risk. Atherogenic dyslipidaemia can be defined by high fasting triglyceride levels (≥2.3 mmol/L) and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c) levels (≤1.0 and ≤1.3 mmol/L in men and women, respectively) in statin-treated patients at high cardiovascular risk. The use of a single marker for the diagnosis and treatment of AD, such as non-HDL-c, was advocated. Interventions including lifestyle optimization and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-lowering therapy with statins (±ezetimibe) are implemented by all experts. Treatment of residual AD can be performed with the addition of fenofibrate, since it can improve the complete lipoprotein profile and reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with AD. Specific clinical scenarios in which fenofibrate may be prescribed are discussed, and include patients with very high triglycerides (≥5.6 mmol/L), patients who are intolerant or resistant to statins, and patients with AD and at high cardiovascular risk. The fenofibrate-statin combination was considered by the experts to benefit from a favourable benefit-risk profile. Cardiovascular experts adopt a multifaceted approach to the prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, with lifestyle optimization, LDL-lowering therapy, and treatment of AD with fenofibrate routinely used to help reduce a patient's overall cardiovascular risk.

A review of the evidence on reducing macrovascular risk in patients with atherogenic dyslipidaemia: A report from an expert consensus meeting on the role of fenofibrate-statin combination therapy.

A meeting of European experts in cardiovascular (CV) disease and lipids was convened in Paris, France, on 10 November 2014 to discuss lipid profile, and in particular atherogenic dyslipidaemia (AD), and associated CV risk. Key points that were raised and discussed during the meeting are summarised in this paper, which also accounts for further discussion and agreement on these points by the group of experts. Elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) are commonly associated with a greater CV risk than low LDL-c levels, and are routinely managed with statins. However, even for patients controlled on statins and achieving low LDL-c levels, abnormal lipid profiles observed in some patients (i.e. elevated triglyceride levels, with/without low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-c]) have been linked to the presence of a residual CV risk. Therefore, it is recommended that both triglyceride and HDL-c levels be measured, to allow for the overall CV residual risk to be adequately managed. Favourable safety and clinical data support the combination of statins with other lipid-lowering agents, such as fenofibrate. Patients who have elevated triglyceride levels plus low levels of HDL-c are most likely to achieve clinical benefit from fenofibrate-statin combination therapy. In these patients with AD, achieving target non-HDL-c levels should be a key focus of CV risk management, and the use of non-HDL-c was advocated to provide a better measure of CV risk than LDL-c levels.

Update in cardiology: vascular risk and cardiac rehabilitation.

As in other fields, understanding of vascular risk and rehabilitation is constantly improving. The present review of recent epidemiological update shows how far we are from achieving good risk factor control: in diet and nutrition, where unhealthy and excessive societal consumption is clearly increasing the prevalence of obesity; in exercise, where it is difficult to find a balance between benefit and risk, despite systemization efforts; in smoking, where developments center on programs and policies, with the electronic cigarette seeming more like a problem than a solution; in lipids, where the transatlantic debate between guidelines is becoming a paradigm of the divergence of views in this extensively studied area; in hypertension, where a nonpharmacological alternative (renal denervation) has been undermined by the SYMPLICITY HTN-3 setback, forcing a deep reassessment; in diabetes mellitus, where the new dipeptidyl peptidase-4 and sodium-glucose cotransporter type 2 inhibitors and glucagon like peptide 1 analogues have contributed much new information and a glimpse of the future of diabetes treatment, and in cardiac rehabilitation, which continues to benefit from new information and communication technologies and where clinical benefit is not hindered by advanced diseases, such as heart failure. Our summary concludes with the update in elderly patients, whose treatment criteria are extrapolated from those of younger patients, with the present review clearly indicating that should not be the case.

Update in cardiology: vascular risk and cardiac rehabilitation.

Cardiovascular disease develops in a slow and subclinical manner over decades, only to manifest suddenly and unexpectedly. The role of prevention is crucial, both before and after clinical appearance, and there is ample evidence of the effectiveness and usefulness of the early detection of at-risk individuals and lifestyle modifications or pharmacological approaches. However, these approaches require time, perseverance, and continuous development. The present article reviews the developments in 2013 in epidemiological aspects related to prevention, includes relevant contributions in areas such as diet, weight control methods (obesity is now considered a disease), and physical activity recommendations (with warnings about the risk of strenuous exercise), deals with habit-related psychosocial factors such as smoking, provides an update on emerging issues such as genetics, addresses the links between cardiovascular disease and other pathologies such as kidney disease, summarizes the contributions of new, updated guidelines (3 of which have recently been released on topics of considerable clinical importance: hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and chronic kidney disease), analyzes the pharmacological advances (largely mediocre except for promising lipid-related results), and finishes by outlining developments in the oft-neglected field of cardiac rehabilitation. This article provides a briefing on controversial issues, presents interesting and somewhat surprising developments, updates established knowledge with undoubted application in clinical practice, and sheds light on potential future contributions.

[Dyslipemia in diabetics treated with statins. Results of the DYSIS study in Spian]. / Dislipemia en población diabética tratada con estatinas. Resultados del estudio DYSIS en España.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) is characterized by carrying a high cardiovascular risk. This situation underscores the importance of intensively treating the risk factors present in diabetic patients, notably dyslipemia. The treatment with cholesterol-lowering drugs may be especially effective to reduce the cardiovascular risk in diabetic patients. Therefore, LDL-cholesterol is a priority target in the lipid management of these patients. This study analyzes the alterations in the lipid profile of diabetic patients receiving treatment with statins, which therefore may contribute to persistent cardiovascular risk in such individuals. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The DYSIS (Dyslipidemia International Study) is an international, observational trial analyzing the lipid profile of patients treated with statins and followed-up on in outpatient clinics by primary care physicians and specialists. This study is referred to the data on the diabetic patients. RESULTS: Of the total patients enrolled in the DYSIS, the present study included 3703 patients, 39% being diabetics. A total of 59.2% of diabetics showed LDL-C out of goal; triglyceride elevation was observed in 43.6% and 36.4% showed low HDL-C. In diabetics patients with coronary heart disease, 31% had uncontrolled levels of all three lipid parameters. The prevalence of out of goal LDL-C in diabetic patients with metabolic syndrome was close to 60%; 39.8% had low levels of HDL-C and 46,6% high levels of triglycerides. In addition, 57% of diabetic patients with obesity showed LDL-C out of control, despite statins treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiovascular diseases remain the main cause of morbidity-mortality in patients with DM2. The results of the present study show that in diabetic patients the degree of control is very limited with regard to LDL-cholesterol. More than half of diabetic patients treated with statins had LDL-cholesterol out of goal. The level of dyslipidemia control was low, despite statins treatment. Therefore, the detection of atherogenic dyslipidemia may point to the advisability of using combination therapy for dyslipidemia in diabetic patients.

[Characteristics of patients with hypertension and metabolic syndrome attended by different specialists]. / Características de los pacientes con hipertensión y síndrome metabólico atendidos por diferentes especialistas.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A large number of patients with cardiovascular risk exhibit metabolic syndrome and are attended by several specialists. There is no information about possible differences in the clinical characteristics and management of these patients by these specialists. The aim of the present study was to evaluate possible differences in clinical features, blood pressure control, therapeutic effort, and therapeutic inertia among medical specialities attending hypertensive patients with metabolic syndrome (MS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cross-sectional study carried out in 17 autonomous communities in Spain, in hypertensive patients with MS consecutively recruited in ambulatory units from departments of cardiology, internal medicine, endocrinology and nephrology. Demographic and clinical data, as well as blood pressure control were assessed. Therapeutic effort was defined as the proportion of patients using 3 or more antihypertensive drugs. Therapeutic inertia was defined as the proportion of patients without any change in antihypertensive treatment despite a lack of blood pressure control (values ≥ 140 and/or 90 mmHg). RESULTS: 2,453 patients (40% women) with a mean age of 64 (11) years were included in the study. We observed some differences in the specific MS components among specialities. Atherogenic dyslipidemia, defined as elevated triglycerides (97%) and/or HDL-cholesterol (61%) was more common in patients attended by cardiologists. Blood pressure control was better achieved by nephrologists (16-33%, depending on the criteria used), and it was accompanied by a greater therapeutical effort (59%). Therapeutical inertia in relation to antihypertensive treatment was more common among endocrinologists (56%). CONCLUSIONS: Hypertensive patients with MS attended by different specialists have similar clinical features, although some differences are present, especially driven by more frequent lipid alterations among those attending cardiology departments. Nephrologists make a greater therapeutic effort and achieve a better blood pressure control. On the contrary, therapeutical inertia is higher among endocrinologists.

Psychiatric morbidity as a risk factor for hospital readmission for acute myocardial infarction: an 8-year follow-up study in Spain.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Most previous studies assess the effect of depression and other psychiatric variables as risk factors for acute myocardial infarction; however, studies that assess the effect of psychiatric disorders as a whole are scarce, compared with other non-psychiatric factors. The aim of this study is to assess the importance of psychiatric morbidity, compared with other risk factors, in hospital readmission for acute myocardial infarction. METHODS: This is a 8-year follow-up study in which the Hospital Discharge Administrative Database was used. RESULTS: From the total sample (11,062 patients), 590 patients (4.88%) were diagnosed with some mental disorder. Psychiatric disorders were more common in women than in men with myocardial infarction (4.76 % and 6.20%, respectively, p-value = 0.002). For those who have had recurrence of stroke, mental disease influences in the consecutive readmission for AMI with the same severity as did tobacco, diabetes, or obesity. CONCLUSIONS: The main finding of this study is the enormous impact of psychiatric disorders on readmissions for AMI, comparable to diabetes, obesity, cerebral vascular disease, and hypertension. Interestingly, the efforts made to treat and prevent psychiatric disorders in AMI patients are clearly lower than those health authorities make with respect to classic risk factors.

Long-term mortality and hospital readmission after acute myocardial infarction: an eight-year follow-up study.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Acute myocardial infarction is responsible for most of the deaths in developed countries and for a very large number of hospital admissions. Specifically in Spain, each year about 140,000 deaths and 5 million hospital stays are due to acute myocardial infarction, corresponding to health care costs reaching 15% of total expenditure. Therefore, this paper presents an exhaustive analysis of acute myocardial infarction and the related prognosis, such as recurrence and mortality. METHODS: This observational study was carried out in Spain. Data were obtained using the Hospital Discharge Administrative Database from 2000 through 2007, inclusive. Specifically, 12,096 cases of acute myocardial infarction (8606 women and 3490 men) were reported during this period, with 2395 readmissions for this diagnosis. Readmissions were analyzed for frequency and duration using logistic regression and the Wang survival model. Mortality was analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Readmission rates were 50% for patients younger than 45 years and 38% for those older than 75 years (P<.001). Men were readmitted more frequently than women throughout the follow-up period. Variables related to hospital mortality from acute myocardial infarction were the presence of diabetes, previous ischemic heart disease, and cerebrovascular disease. CONCLUSIONS: Mid-term hospital readmissions are highly frequent in acute myocardial infarction survivors. Male sex, previous coronary heart disease, and the number of classical cardiovascular risk factors are the major risk predictors of this readmission. Our results highlight the need for improved medical care during acute myocardial infarction admission, integrated into secondary prevention programs.

ESC/EAS Guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias: the Task Force for the management of dyslipidaemias of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS).

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) due to atherosclerosis of the arterial vessel wall and to thrombosis is the foremost cause of premature mortality and of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in Europe, and is also increasingly common in developing countries.1 In the European Union, the economic cost of CVD represents annually E192 billion1 in direct and indirect healthcare costs. The main clinical entities are coronary artery disease (CAD), ischaemic stroke, and peripheral arterial disease (PAD). The causes of these CVDs are multifactorial. Some of these factors relate to lifestyles, such as tobacco smoking, lack of physical activity, and dietary habits, and are thus modifiable. Other risk factors are also modifiable, such as elevated blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, and dyslipidaemias, or non-modifiable, such as age and male gender. These guidelines deal with the management of dyslipidaemias as an essential and integral part of CVD prevention. Prevention and treatment of dyslipidaemias should always be considered within the broader framework of CVD prevention, which is addressed in guidelines of the Joint European Societies' Task forces on CVD prevention in clinical practice.2 ­ 5 The latest version of these guidelines was published in 20075; an update will become available in 2012. These Joint ESC/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) guidelines on the management of dyslipidaemias are complementary to the guidelines on CVD prevention in clinical practice and address not only physicians [e.g. general practitioners (GPs) and cardiologists] interested in CVD prevention, but also specialists from lipid clinics or metabolic units who are dealing with dyslipidaemias that are more difficult to classify and treat.