[Diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular risk: Working group recommendations of Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease of the Spanish Society of Diabetes (SED, 2015)]. / Diabetes mellitus y riesgo cardiovascular: recomendaciones del Grupo de Trabajo Diabetes y Enfermedad Cardiovascular de la Sociedad Española de Diabetes (SED, 2015).

The present paper updates the Clinical Practice Recommendations for the management of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) in diabetes mellitus. This is a medical consensus agreed by an independent panel of experts from the Spanish Society of Diabetes (SED). Several consensuses have been proposed by scientific and medical Societies to achieve clinical goals. However, the risk score for general population may lack sensitivity for individual assessment or for particular groups at risk, such as diabetics. Traditional risk factors together with non-traditional factors are reviewed throughout this paper. Intervention strategies for managing CVRF in the diabetic patient are reviewed in detail: balanced food intake, weight reduction, physical exercise, smoking cessation, reduction in HbA1c, therapy for high blood pressure, obesity, lipid disorders, and platelet anti-aggregation. It is hoped that these guidelines can help clinicians in the decisions of their clinical activity. This regular update by the SED Cardiovascular Disease Group of the most relevant concepts, and of greater practical and realistic clinical interest, is presented in order to reduce CVR of diabetics.

Implementation of Spanish adaptation of the European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The successful implementation of cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention guidelines relies heavily on primary care physicians (PCPs) providing risk factor evaluation, intervention and patient education. The aim of this study was to ascertain the degree of awareness and implementation of the Spanish adaptation of the European guidelines on CVD prevention in clinical practice (CEIPC guidelines) among PCPs. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of PCPs was conducted in Spain between January and June 2011. A random sample of 1,390 PCPs was obtained and stratified by region. Data were collected by means of a self-administered questionnaire. RESULTS: More than half (58%) the physicians were aware of and knew the recommendations, and 62% of those claimed to use them in clinical practice, with general physicians (without any specialist accreditation) being less likely to so than family doctors. Most PCPs (60%) did not assess cardiovascular risk, with the limited time available in the surgery being cited as the greatest barrier by 81%. The main reason to be sceptical about recommendations, reported by 71% of physicians, was that there are too many guidelines. Almost half the doctors cited the lack of training and skills as the greatest barrier to the implementation of lifestyle and behavioural change recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: Most PCPs were aware of the Spanish adaptation of the European guidelines on CVD prevention (CEIPC guidelines) and knew their content. However, only one third of PCPs used the guidelines in clinical practice and less than half CVD risk assessment tools.

Consensus document for lipid profile determination and reporting in Spanish clinical laboratories. What parameters should be included in a basic lipid profile?

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) continue to be the main cause of death in our country. Adequate control of lipid metabolism disorders is a key challenge in cardiovascular prevention that is far from being achieved in real clinical practice. There is a great heterogeneity in the reports of lipid metabolism from Spanish clinical laboratories, which may contribute to its poor control. For this reason, a working group of the main scientific societies involved in the care of patients at vascular risk, has prepared this document with a consensus proposal on the determination of the basic lipid profile in cardiovascular prevention, recommendations for its realization and unification of criteria to incorporate the lipid control goals appropriate to the vascular risk of the patients in the laboratory reports.

Consensus document for lipid profile testing and reporting in Spanish clinical laboratories: what parameters should a basic lipid profile include?

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) continue to be the main cause of death in our country. Adequate control of lipid metabolism disorders is a key challenge in cardiovascular prevention that is far from being achieved in real clinical practice. There is a great heterogeneity in the reports of lipid metabolism from Spanish clinical laboratories, which may contribute to its poor control. For this reason, a working group of the main scientific societies involved in the care of patients at vascular risk, has prepared this document with a consensus proposal on the determination of the basic lipid profile in cardiovascular prevention, recommendations for its realization and unification of criteria to incorporate the lipid control goals appropriate to the vascular risk of the patients in the laboratory reports.

Consensus document for lipid profile determination and reporting in Spanish clinical laboratories. What parameters should be included in a basic lipid profile? / Documento de consenso para la determinación e informe del perfil lipídico en laboratorios clínicos españoles: ¿Qué parámetros debe incluir un perfil lipídico básico?

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) continue to be the main cause of death in our country. Adequate control of lipid metabolism disorders is a key challenge in cardiovascular prevention that is far from being achieved in real clinical practice. There is a great heterogeneity in the reports of lipid metabolism from Spanish clinical laboratories, which may contribute to its poor control. For this reason, a working group of the main scientific societies involved in the care of patients at vascular risk, has prepared this document with a consensus proposal on the determination of the basic lipid profile in cardiovascular prevention, recommendations for its realization and unification of criteria to incorporate the lipid control goals appropriate to the vascular risk of the patients in the laboratory reports.

Consensus document for lipid profile testing and reporting in Spanish clinical laboratories.

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) continue to be the main cause of death in our country. Adequate control of lipid metabolism disorders is a key challenge in cardiovascular prevention that is far from being achieved in real clinical practice. There is a great heterogeneity in the reports of lipid metabolism from Spanish clinical laboratories, which may contribute to its poor control. For this reason, a working group of the main scientific societies involved in the care of patients at vascular risk, has prepared this document with a consensus proposal on the determination of the basic lipid profile in cardiovascular prevention, recommendations for its realization and unification of criteria to incorporate the lipid control goals appropriate to the vascular risk of the patients in the laboratory reports.

Clinical Recommendations to Manage Gastrointestinal Adverse Events in Patients Treated with Glp-1 Receptor Agonists: A Multidisciplinary Expert Consensus.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are indicated in type 2 diabetes and obesity for their high efficacy in controlling glycaemia and inducing body weight loss, respectively. Patients may develop gastrointestinal adverse events (GI AEs), namely nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and/or constipation. To minimize their severity and duration, healthcare providers (HCPs) and patients must be aware of appropriate measures to follow while undergoing treatment. An expert panel comprising endocrinologists, nephrologists, primary care physicians, cardiologists, internists and diabetes nurse educators convened across virtual meetings to reach a consensus regarding these compelling recommendations. Firstly, specific guidelines are provided about how to reach the maintenance dose and how to proceed if GI AEs develop during dose-escalation. Secondly, specific directions are set about how to avoid/minimize nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and constipation symptoms. Clinical scenarios representing common situations in daily practice, and infographics useful to guide both HCPs and patients, are included. These recommendations may prevent people with T2D and/or obesity from withdrawing from GLP-1 RAs treatment, thus benefitting from their superior effect on glycaemic control and weight loss.

Diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular risk: an update of the recommendations of the Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease Working Group of the Spanish Society of Diabetes (SED, 2021). / Diabetes mellitus y riesgo cardiovascular: actualización de las recomendaciones del Grupo de Trabajo de Diabetes y Enfermedad Cardiovascular de la Sociedad Española de Diabetes (SED, 2021).

This document is an update to the clinical practice recommendations for the management of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) in diabetes mellitus. The consensus has been developed by a multidisciplinary team made up of members of the Cardiovascular Risk Group of the Spanish Diabetes Society (SED). The work is a necessary update as, since the last review three years ago, there have been many clinical trials that have studied the cardiovascular outcomes of numerous drugs in the diabetic population. We believe that this guideline update may be of interest to all clinicians treating patients with diabetes.

Development and feasibility of 4 checklists for the evaluation of comorbidity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis and psoriatic arthritis: GECOAI Project.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and assess the feasibility in daily practice of four comorbidity checklists, for common use in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of experts on comorbidity was established. Data from the GECOAR, GECOAX and GECOAP projects were analysed and a narrative literature review in Medline on RA, axSpA and PsA comorbidity was performed in order to select the most relevant and common comorbidities across the three diseases. With these results and those obtained from a focus group of patients, in a nominal group meeting, the experts generated preliminary checklists. These were afterwards modified by an external evaluation by two associations, a patients' association and an association of health professionals related to rheumatology. As a result, the final checklists were generated. A cross-sectional study was conducted to test the feasibility of three of the checklists in daily practice, in which eight health professionals evaluated the checklists in five patients with RA, five with axSpA and five with SpA. RESULTS: Four comorbidity checklists were designed, three for health professionals (one to assess current comorbidity, one on prevention/health promotion and one with the referral criteria to other health professionals), and another for patients. The feasibility study showed them to be simple, clear, and useful for use in routine clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: The use of specific and common checklists for patients with RA, axSpA and PsA is feasible and might contribute favorably to their prognosis as well as in daily practice.

[Management of patients with dyslipidaemia in Spain. The Cardio Right Care Control of cardiovascular risk project]. / Manejo del paciente con dislipidemia en España. Proyecto Cardio Right Care Control del Riesgo Cardiovascular.

OBJECTIVE: To ascertain the opinion of physicians about diagnostic criteria, control targets, control rates, and therapeutic approach of patients with dyslipidaemia in Spain. METHODS: A specific questionnaire was created about diagnostic criteria, control targets, control rates, lipid lowering therapies, and therapeutic inertia in patients with dyslipidaemia. Physicians completed the questionnaire online during a 4-month period. RESULTS: A total of 959 questionnaires were collected from all over Spain. The most frequent scale to stratify cardiovascular risk is SCORE (54.9%), and guidelines from the European Society of Cardiology are the most common guidelines used (50.5%). The majority of patients are on primary prevention (57.7%), and 31.4% have a high-very high cardiovascular risk. More than 70% of investigators considered that the target among patients at very high risk and those in secondary prevention is an LDL cholesterol < 70 mg/dL. It is considered by 60.0% and 66.4% of investigators that their patients on primary and secondary prevention, respectively, achieve control targets. Statins are the most common lipid lowering drugs used, followed by ezetimibe. In the majority of cases, when a patient is not adequately controlled with statins, there is an increase in the dose or a change to another statin. Poor adherence to treatment and therapeutic inertia are the main reasons for poor LDL cholesterol control. CONCLUSIONS: The Cardio Right Care CVR Control project allows those aspects to be identified, as well as areas of improvement in patients with dyslipidaemia in Spain.

Development and feasibility of 4 checklists for the evaluation of comorbidity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis and psoriatic arthritis: GECOAI Project. / Desarrollo y viabilidad de cuatro checklists para la evaluación de la comorbilidad en pacientes con artritis reumatoide, espondiloartritis axial y artritis psoriásica: Proyecto GECOAI.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and assess the feasibility in daily practice of four comorbidity checklists, for common use in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). METHODS: A multidisciplinary panel of experts on comorbidity was established. Data from the GECOAR, GECOAX and GECOAP projects were analysed and a narrative literature review in Medline on RA, axSpA and PsA comorbidity was performed in order to select the most relevant and common comorbidities across the three diseases. With these results and those obtained from a focus group of patients, in a nominal group meeting, the experts generated preliminary checklists. These were afterwards modified by an external evaluation by two associations, a patients' association and an association of health professionals related to rheumatology. As a result, the final checklists were generated. A cross-sectional study was conducted to test the feasibility of three of the checklists in daily practice, in which eight health professionals evaluated the checklists in five patients with RA, five with axSpA and five with SpA. RESULTS: Four comorbidity checklists were designed, three for health professionals (one to assess current comorbidity, one on prevention/health promotion and one with the referral criteria to other health professionals), and another for patients. The feasibility study showed them to be simple, clear, and useful for use in routine clinical practice. CONCLUSIONS: The use of specific and common checklists for patients with RA, axSpA and PsA is feasible and might contribute favorably to their prognosis as well as in daily practice.

[Telemedicine consultation for the clinical cardiologists in the era of COVID-19: present and future. Consensus document of the Spanish Society of Cardiology]. / La consulta telemática para el cardiólogo clínico en tiempos de la COVID-19: presente y futuro. Documento de consenso de la Sociedad Española de Cardiología.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed how we view our consultations. To reduce the risk of spread in the most vulnerable patients (those with heart disease) and health personnel, most face-to-face consultations have been replaced by telemedicine consultations. Although this change has been rapidly introduced, it will most likely become a permanent feature of clinical practice. Nevertheless, there remain serious doubts about organizational and legal issues, as well as the possibilities for improvement etc. In this consensus document of the Spanish Society of Cardiology, we attempt to provide some keys to improve the quality of care in this new way of working, reviewing the most frequent heart diseases attended in the cardiology outpatient clinic and proposing some minimal conditions for this health care process. These heart diseases are ischemic heart disease, heart failure, and arrhythmias. In these 3 scenarios, we attempt to clarify the basic issues that must be checked during the telephone interview, describe the patients who should attend in person, and identify the criteria to refer patients for follow-up in primary care. This document also describes some improvements that can be introduced in telemedicine consultations to improve patient care.

Telemedicine consultation for the clinical cardiologists in the era of COVID-19: present and future. Consensus document of the Spanish Society of Cardiology.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed how we view our consultations. To reduce the risk of spread in the most vulnerable patients (those with heart disease) and health personnel, most face-to-face consultations have been replaced by telemedicine consultations. Although this change has been rapidly introduced, it will most likely become a permanent feature of clinical practice. Nevertheless, there remain serious doubts about organizational and legal issues, as well as the possibilities for improvement etc. In this consensus document of the Spanish Society of Cardiology, we attempt to provide some keys to improve the quality of care in this new way of working, reviewing the most frequent heart diseases attended in the cardiology outpatient clinic and proposing some minimal conditions for this health care process. These heart diseases are ischemic heart disease, heart failure, and arrhythmias. In these 3 scenarios, we attempt to clarify the basic issues that must be checked during the telephone interview, describe the patients who should attend in person, and identify the criteria to refer patients for follow-up in primary care. This document also describes some improvements that can be introduced in telemedicine consultations to improve patient care.

Documento de consenso para la determinación e informe del perfil lipídico en laboratorios clínicos españoles ¿Qué parámetros debe incluir un perfil lípido básico? / Consensus document to determine and report the lipid profile in spanish clinical laboratories. Which parameters should a basic lipid profile include?

Las enfermedades cardiovasculares (ECV) siguen siendo la principal causa de muerte en nuestro país. El control adecuado de las alteraciones del metabolismo lipídico es un reto clave en prevención cardiovascular que está lejos de alcanzarse en la práctica clínica real. Existe una gran heterogeneidad en los informes del metabolismo lipídico de los laboratorios clínicos españoles, lo que puede contribuir al mal control del mismo. Por ello, un grupo de trabajo de las principales sociedades científicas implicadas en la atención de los pacientes de riesgo vascular, hemos elaborado este documento con una propuesta básica de consenso sobre la determinación del perfil lipídico básico en prevención cardiovascular, recomendaciones para su realización y unificación de criterios para incorporar los objetivos de control lipídico adecuados al riesgo vascular de los pacientes en los informes de laboratorio.(AU)

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) continue to be the main cause of death in Spain. Adequate control of lipid metabolism disorders is a key challenge in cardiovascular prevention that is far from achieved in real clinical practice. There is a major heterogeneity in the reports of lipid metabolism from Spanish clinical laboratories, which may contribute to its poor monitoring. For this reason, a working group of the main scientific societies involved in the care of patients at vascular risk, has drawn up this document with a consensus proposal on the determination of the basic lipid profile in cardiovascular prevention, recommendations for its implementation and combining the criteria to incorporate the lipid monitoring goals suitable for the vascular risk of the patients in the laboratory reports.(AU)

Documento de consenso para la determinación e informe del perfil lipídico en laboratorios clínicos españoles / Consensus document for lipid profile determination and reporting in Spanish clinical laboratories. What parameters should be included in a basic lipid profile?

Las enfermedades cardiovasculares (ECV) siguen siendo la principal causa de muerte en nuestro país. El control adecuado de las alteraciones del metabolismo lipídico es un reto clave en prevención cardiovascular que está lejos de alcanzarse en la práctica clínica real. Existe una gran heterogeneidad en los informes del metabolismo lipídico de los laboratorios clínicos españoles, lo que puede contribuir al mal control del mismo. Por ello, un grupo de trabajo de las principales sociedades científicas implicadas en la atención de los pacientes de riesgo vascular hemos elaborado este documento con una propuesta básica de consenso sobre la determinación del perfil lipídico básico en prevención cardiovascular, recomendaciones para su realización y unificación de criterios para incorporar los objetivos de control lipídico adecuados al riesgo vascular de los pacientes en los informes de laboratorio. (AU)

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) continue to be the main cause of death in our country. Adequate control of lipid metabolism disorders is a key challenge in cardiovascular prevention that is far from being achieved in real clinical practice. There is a great heterogeneity in the reports of lipid metabolism from Spanish clinical laboratories, which may contribute to its poor control. For this reason, a working group of the main scientific societies involved in the care of patients at vascular risk, has prepared this document with a consensus proposal on the determination of the basic lipid profile in cardiovascular prevention, recommendations for its realization and unification of criteria to incorporate the lipid control goals appropriate to the vascular risk of the patients in the laboratory reports. (AU)

Diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular risk: Update of the recommendations of the Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease working group of the Spanish Diabetes Society (SED, 2018). / Diabetes mellitus y riesgo cardiovascular. Actualización de las recomendaciones del Grupo de Trabajo de Diabetes y Riesgo Cardiovascular de la Sociedad Española de Diabetes (SED, 2018).

This document is an update to the clinical practice recommendations for the management of cardiovascular risk factors in diabetes mellitus. The consensus is made by members of the Cardiovascular Risk Group of the Spanish Diabetes Society. We have proposed and updated interventions on lifestyle, pharmacological treatment indicated to achieve therapeutic objectives according to the levels of HbA1c, degree of obesity, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, heart failure, platelet antiagregation, renal insufficiency, and diabetes in the elderly, as well as new biomarkers of interest in the evaluation of cardiovascular risk in individuals with diabetes mellitus. The work is an update of the interventions and therapeutic objectives in addition, it is noted the need for the inclusion of specialists in Endocrinology, Metabolism and Nutrition in Cardiac Rehabilitation Units for the control and monitoring of this population.

Recommendations for the Management of Comorbidity in Patients With Axial Spondyloarthritis in Clinical Practice. / Recomendaciones para el manejo de la comorbilidad en la práctica clínica en pacientes con espondiloartritis axial.

OBJECTIVES: To identify priorities among comorbidities in axial spondyloarthritis (AxSpA) and recommend how to follow them from an eminently practical perspective. METHODS: A multidisciplinary group was selected (10 rheumatologists-six of them experts in AxSpA-, 2 general practitioners, an internist, a cardiologist, a gastroenterologist and a psychologist). In a first discussion meeting, the scope and users were established and a list of comorbidities was voted based on frequency and impact. The panelists had to defend the inclusion of each comorbidity/item in the document with consistent arguments. Four panelists and two methodologists developed systematic reviews on controversial topics. In a second meeting, the results of the reviews and the arguments concerning the items to be included were presented. After the meeting, the final document was drafted. RESULTS: The final document includes two checklists, one for health professionals and another for patients; they incorporate cardiovascular risk, renal comorbidities, gastrointestinal risk, lifestyle, risk of infections and vaccinations, pulmonary involvement, concomitant medication, psycho-affective disorders, osteoporosis, and risk of fracture. In addition, the document reflects the arguments favoring the inclusion of each item and how to record the items for subsequent collection. The panel considered it also appropriate to likewise establish «practices to avoid¼ applicable to comorbidity in AxSpA. CONCLUSIONS: Two checklists and a list of situations to avoid were generated to facilitate the management of comorbidities in AxSpA. In a future step, their utility and acceptance will be tested by a broad group of users that includes doctors, patients and nurses.

Desarrollo y viabilidad de cuatro checklists para la evaluación de la comorbilidad en pacientes con artritis reumatoide, espondiloartritis axial y artritis psoriásica: Proyecto GECOAI / Development and feasibility of 4 checklists for the evaluation of comorbidity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis and psoriatic arthritis: GECOAI Project

Objetivo: Desarrollar y analizar la viabilidad en la práctica diaria de cuatro checklists relacionados con la comorbilidad, comunes para pacientes con artritis reumatoide (AR), espondiloartritis axial (EspAax) y artritis psoriásica (APs). Métodos: Se estableció un grupo multidisciplinar de expertos en comorbilidad. Se revisaron los proyectos GECOAR, GECOAX y GECOAP, y se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica en Medline sobre comorbilidad en AR, EspAax y APs, para seleccionar las comorbilidades más relevantes y comunes a las tres enfermedades. Con estos resultados y los obtenidos de un grupo focal de pacientes, en una reunión de grupo nominal, los expertos generaron unos checklists preliminares. Estos listados preliminares se modificaron, tras una evaluación externa por una asociación de pacientes y otra de profesionales de la salud relacionados con la reumatología, para generar los checklists definitivos. Finalmente, se realizó un estudio transversal, en el que ocho profesionales de la salud evaluaron tres checklists en cinco pacientes con AR, cinco con EspAax y cinco con APs. Resultados: Se diseñaron cuatro checklists de comorbilidad, tres para profesionales de la salud (uno sobre evaluación de la comorbilidad presente, otro sobre prevención/promoción de la salud y un último con los criterios de derivación a otros profesionales), y otro para pacientes. El estudio de viabilidad mostró que son sencillos, claros y útiles para su uso en la práctica clínica habitual. Conclusiones: El uso de checklists específicos y comunes para pacientes con AR, EspAax y APs es factible y puede contribuir favorablemente en su pronóstico así como en la práctica clínica habitual.(AU)

Objective: To develop and assess the feasibility in daily practice of four comorbidity checklists, for common use in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and psoriatic arthritis (PsA). Methods: A multidisciplinary panel of experts on comorbidity was established. Data from the GECOAR, GECOAX and GECOAP projects were analysed and a narrative literature review in Medline on RA, axSpA and PsA comorbidity was performed in order to select the most relevant and common comorbidities across the three diseases. With these results and those obtained from a focus group of patients, in a nominal group meeting, the experts generated preliminary checklists. These were afterwards modified by an external evaluation by two associations, a patients’ association and an association of health professionals related to rheumatology. As a result, the final checklists were generated. A cross-sectional study was conducted to test the feasibility of three of the checklists in daily practice, in which eight health professionals evaluated the checklists in five patients with RA, five with axSpA and five with SpA. Results: Four comorbidity checklists were designed, three for health professionals (one to assess current comorbidity, one on prevention/health promotion and one with the referral criteria to other health professionals), and another for patients. The feasibility study showed them to be simple, clear, and useful for use in routine clinical practice. Conclusions: The use of specific and common checklists for patients with RA, axSpA and PsA is feasible and might contribute favorably to their prognosis as well as in daily practice.(AU)

Diabetes mellitus y riesgo cardiovascular: actualización de las recomendaciones del Grupo de Trabajo de Diabetes y Enfermedad Cardiovascular de la Sociedad Española de Diabetes (SED, 2021) / Diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular risk: an update of the recommendations of the Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease Working Group of the Spanish Society of Diabetes (SED, 2021)

El presente documento es una actualización de las recomendaciones de práctica clínica para el manejo de los factores de riesgo cardiovascular (FRCV) en la diabetes mellitus. Este consenso ha sido elaborado por los miembros del Grupo de Riesgo Cardiovascular de la Sociedad Española de Diabetes (SED). El trabajo es una actualización necesaria, ya que desde la última revisión hace tres años, son numerosos los ensayos clínicos que han estudiado los resultados cardiovasculares de distintos fármacos en la población diabética. La presente actualización de la guía creemos que puede ser interés para todos aquellos clínicos que tratan a pacientes con diabetes.

This document is an update to the clinical practice recommendations for the management of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF) in diabetes mellitus. The consensus has been developed by a multidisciplinary team made up of members of the Cardiovascular Risk Group of the Spanish Diabetes Society (SED). The work is a necessary update as, since the last review three years ago, there have been many clinical trials that have studied the cardiovascular outcomes of numerous drugs in the diabetic population.We believe that this guideline update may be of interest to all clinicians treating patients with diabetes.