Absence of High Lipoprotein(a) Levels Is an Independent Predictor of Acute Myocardial Infarction without Coronary Lesions.

The pathophysiological mechanisms underlying Myocardial Infarction with Non-Obstructive Coronary Artery Disease (MINOCA) are still under debate. Lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)] has proinflammatory and prothrombotic actions and has been involved in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. However, no previous studies have linked Lp(a) levels with the probability of developing MINOCA. Moreover, the relationship between MINOCA and the plasma levels of other proatherogenic and proinflammatory molecules such as Interleukin-18 (IL18) and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) has not been studied. We conducted a prospective, multicenter study involving 1042 patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Seventy-six patients had no significant coronary lesions. All patients underwent plasma analysis on admission. MINOCA patients were younger (57 (47-68) vs. 61 (52-72) years; p = 0.010), more frequently female (44.7% vs. 21.0%; p < 0.001), and had lower rates of diabetes and of Lp(a) > 60 mg/dL (9.2% vs. 19.8%; p = 0.037) than those with coronary lesions; moreover, High Density Lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c) levels were higher in MINOCA patients. The absence of Lp(a) > 60 mg/dL and of diabetes were independent predictors of MINOCA, as well as female sex, high HDL-c levels, and younger age. IL-18 and PCSK9 levels were not predictors of MINOCA. During a follow-up of 5.23 (2.89, 7.37) years, the independent predictors of the primary outcome (acute ischemic events or death) in the whole sample were Lp(a) > 60 mg/dL, older age, low estimated Glomerular Filtration rate (eGFR), hypertension, previous heart failure (HF), coronary artery bypass graft, use of insulin, and no therapy with acetylsalicylic acid. In conclusion, in AMI patients, the absence of high Lp(a) levels, as well high HDL-c levels, were independent predictors of the inexistence of coronary artery disease. High Lp (a) levels were also an independent predictor of ischemic events or death.

Prevalence and prognosis of anxiety, insomnia, and type D personality in patients with myocardial infarction: A Spanish cohort.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested that patients with myocardial infarction and non-obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA) have more psycho-emotional disorders than patients with obstructive coronary artery disease (MICAD). The aim of this study is to compare the prevalence of anxiety, insomnia, and type D personality between MINOCA and MICAD and their impact on prognosis. METHODS: Patients with myocardial infarction undergoing coronary angiography were prospectively enrolled. Psychological questionnaires were completed by each patient during admission. RESULTS: Among a total of 533 patients, 56 had MINOCA and 477 had MICAD. There were no differences in the prevalence of anxiety and insomnia between both groups: trait anxiety median value (M) MINOCA = 18 (11-34) vs. MICAD M = 19 (12-27), p = 0.8; state anxiety MINOCA M = 19 (11-29) vs. MICAD M = 19 (12.2-26), p = 0.6; and insomnia MINOCA M = 7 (3-11) vs. MICAD M = 7 (3-12), p = 0.95. More MINOCA patients had type D personality (45.0% vs. 28.5%, p = 0.03). At 3-year follow-up, there were no differences in mortality between MINOCA and MICAD (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.28-2.17) in major adverse cerebral or cardiovascular events (MACCE) (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.38-1.31). Scores of trait anxiety and negative affectivity were significantly associated with MACCE (HR 1.65, 95% CI [1.05-2.57]; HR 1.75, 95% CI [1.11-2.77], respectively). High insomnia levels were associated with greater mortality (HR 2.72, 95% CI [1.12-6.61]). CONCLUSIONS: Anxiety and insomnia levels were similar between patients with MINOCA and those with MICAD, whilst the prevalence of type D personality was higher in the MINOCA than in the MICAD group. Higher scores in trait anxiety, insomnia, and negative affectivity were related to a worse prognosis at 3-year follow-up.

The Gender Perspective Within the OFRECE Study: Differences in Health Care Among Patients Consulting for Chest Pain and/or Palpitations.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To analyze differences between sexes in the clinical management of patients presenting with symptoms of chest pain and/or palpitations within a population-based study. METHODS: The OFRECE study included a random sample of 8400 individuals from the Spanish population aged 40 years and older; 1132 (13.5%) had previously consulted for chest pain and 1267 (15.1%) had consulted for palpitations and were included in the present study. We calculated both the crude and adjusted odds ratios (OR) of undergoing certain tests and the results of consultations by sex. Adjustment was performed by classic cardiovascular risk factors, a personal history of cardiovascular disease, and a diagnosis of stable angina or atrial fibrillation confirmed in the OFRECE study in each case. RESULTS: No differences were observed in history of consultation for chest pain between women and men (13% vs 14.1%; P=.159) but differences were found in palpitations (19% vs 10.4%, respectively; P <.001). Women who had previously consulted for chest pain underwent fewer echocardiograms (32.5% vs 45.3%, respectively; P <.001), were less frequently referred to a cardiologist (49.1% vs 60.1%; P <.001), were less often admitted to hospital (20.1% vs 39.4%; P <.001), and less frequently received a confirmed diagnosis (60.9 vs 71, 9; P <.001). After full adjustment, all differences decreased and become nonsignificant echocardiograms: adjusted OR, 0.81; 95%CI, 0.60-1.09; referral to a cardiologist: adjusted OR, 0.86; 95%CI, 0.63-1.16; hospital admission: adjusted OR, 0.76; 95%CI, 0.54-1.09). For palpitations, crude differences were smaller and all became nonsignificant after adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: This study does not confirm the existence of sex-related bias in the management of chest pain and palpitations. However, such bias cannot be completely ruled out in diagnoses confirmed within the OFRECE study, which might limit its ability to detect sex-related differences in health care.

Abnormal Electrocardiographic Findings in the Population Older Than 40 Years. Prevalence and Clinical Significance. Results of the OFRECE Study.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Abnormal electrocardiographic findings are highly common. The aim of this study was to analyze the prevalence of abnormal electrocardiographic patterns in the general Spanish population aged 40 years or older. METHODS: This subanalysis of the OFRECE study selected a representative sample of the Spanish population aged 40 years or older. Clinical data and electrocardiograms were available in all participants. The electrocardiograms were read centrally. Each electrocardiogram was independently assessed by 2 trained cardiologists and, if there was disagreement, a third was consulted to reach a consensus-based diagnosis. Prior to reading the electrocardiograms, diagnostic criteria were strictly defined for each of the abnormalities analyzed. We analyzed the prevalence and clinical factors associated with cavity enlargement, conduction disorders, repolarization abnormalities, pathological Q waves, atrial and ventricular premature beats, and pre-excitation. RESULTS: A total of 8343 individuals were evaluated, (mean age, 59.2 years; 52.4% women). Only 4074 (51.2%) participants had a completely normal electrocardiogram. The most frequent abnormalities were nonspecific repolarization abnormalities (16%) associated with coronary heart disease and atrial fibrillation; right bundle-branch block (8.1%) associated with chronic pulmonary obstructive disease; left anterior hemiblock (6.5%) related to hypertension and congestive heart failure; and long PR interval (3.7%), which was associated with coronary heart disease. CONCLUSIONS: Electrocardiographic abnormalities are very common in the general population aged 40 years or older. Only about half of the population had a completely normal electrocardiogram.

Cardiologists and the Cardiology of the Future. Vision and proposals of the Spanish Society of Cardiology for the Cardiology of the 21st Century.

The Cardiology of the Future is a project of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC) whose objectives are as follows: to define the action policies of the SEC; to analyze the trends and changes in the environment that will influence the practice of cardiology in Spain; to define the profile of the cardiologists needed in the future; to propose policies to achieve the objectives resulting from the identified needs; and to identify the role of the SEC in the development and implementation of these policies. This article describes the methodology and the most relevant findings of the final report of this project and the strategic lines to be developed by the SEC in the immediate future, resulting from the analysis performed.

[Coronary revascularization: clinical features and indications]. / Indicaciones de revascularización: aspectos clínicos.

Coronary artery revascularization is an established therapeutic intervention and is therefore included in all treatment guidelines for patients with coronary artery disease. Although the procedure has been available for more than 40 years, constant technical progress in surgical and percutaneous revascularization continues to bring the benefits of revascularization therapy to new groups of patients. Therefore the indications and limitations of this approach need to be reviewed and updated periodically. The aim of revascularization therapy is to improve the prognosis or symptoms and quality of life in patients with ischemic heart disease. The revascularization process comprises two aspects: 1) indication and selection of the revascularization procedure, and 2) performance of the procedure. Involvement of the clinical cardiologist in the first step is fundamental. Basing their decisions on clinical, functional and anatomical features, these professionals detect and select patients who would benefit, and also help to select the revascularization technique. In this Update article on revascularization we review, for stable ischemic heart disease and non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes, the following: 1) the most relevant aspects to consider when evaluating the need for and the type of revascularization (age, sex, diabetes, renal function, electrocardiographic changes, ventricular function and quantification of functional relevance of coronary artery disease and viability of the acinetic areas); 2) indications for surgical or percutaneous intervention, and the choice of therapeutic strategy according to the latest clinical evidence and guidelines of scientific societies, and 3) currently available data on the controversy regarding choice of the revascularization procedure in patients with multivessel disease.