Coronary artery calcium in patients with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease (CHD) is a major cause of increased mortality rates in patients with schizophrenia. Moreover, coronary artery calcium (CAC) score is associated with CHD. We hypothesized that patients with schizophrenia have more CAC than the general population and aimed to investigate the CAC score in patients with schizophrenia compared to norms based on the general population. Additionally, this study investigated if age, sex, diabetes, dyslipidemia and smoking were associated with the CAC score. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study, 163 patients with schizophrenia underwent cardiac computed tomography, and the CAC score was measured and compared to norms by classifying the CAC scores in relation to the age- and gender matched norm 50th, 75th and 90th percentiles. Logistic and linear regression were carried out to investigate explanatory variables for the presence and extent of CAC, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 127 (77.9%) patients had a CAC score below or equal to the matched 50th, 20 (12.3%) above the 75th and nine (5.5%) above the 90th percentile. Male sex (P < 0.05), age (P < 0.001) and smoking (P < 0.05) were associated with the presence of CAC while age (P < 0.001) and diabetes (P < 0.01) were associated with the extent of CAC. CONCLUSIONS: The amount of CAC in patients with schizophrenia follows norm percentiles, and variables associated with the CAC score are similar in patients with schizophrenia and the general population. These findings indicate that the CAC score may not be sufficient to detect the risk of CHD in patients with schizophrenia. Future studies should explore other measures of subclinical CHD, including measures of peripheral atherosclerosis or cardiac autonomic neuropathy to improve early detection and intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02885792 , September 1, 2016.

Disparities in Screening and Treatment of Cardiovascular Diseases in Patients With Mental Disorders Across the World: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 47 Observational Studies.

OBJECTIVE: This study used meta-analysis to assess disparities in cardiovascular disease (CVD) screening and treatment in people with mental disorders, a group that has elevated CVD incidence and mortality. METHODS: The authors searched PubMed and PsycInfo through July 31, 2020, and conducted a random-effect meta-analysis of observational studies comparing CVD screening and treatment in people with and without mental disorders. The primary outcome was odds ratios for CVD screening and treatment. Sensitivity analyses on screening and treatment separately and on specific procedures, subgroup analyses by country, and by controlling for confounding by indication, as well as meta-regressions, were also run, and publication bias and quality were assessed. RESULTS: Forty-seven studies (N=24,400,452 patients, of whom 1,283,602 had mental disorders) from North America (k=26), Europe (k=16), Asia (k=4), and Australia (k=1) were meta-analyzed. Lower rates of screening or treatment in patients with mental disorders emerged for any CVD (k=47, odds ratio=0.773, 95% CI=0.742, 0.804), coronary artery disease (k=34, odds ratio=0.734, 95% CI=0.690, 0.781), cerebrovascular disease (k=8, odds ratio=0.810, 95% CI=0.779, 0.842), and other mixed CVDs (k=11, odds ratio=0.839, 95% CI=0.761, 0.924). Significant disparities emerged for any screening, any intervention, catheterization or revascularization in coronary artery disease, intravenous thrombolysis for stroke, and treatment with any and with specific medications for CVD across all mental disorders (except for CVD medications in mood disorders). Disparities were largest for schizophrenia, and they differed across countries. Median study quality was high (Newcastle-Ottawa Scale score, 8); higher-quality studies found larger disparities, and publication bias did not affect results. CONCLUSIONS: People with mental disorders, and those with schizophrenia in particular, receive less screening and lower-quality treatment for CVD. It is of paramount importance to address underprescribing of CVD medications and underutilization of diagnostic and therapeutic procedures across all mental disorders.

Bivalirudin Versus Heparin Monotherapy in Elderly Patients With Myocardial Infarction: A Prespecified Subgroup Analysis of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART Trial.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are at increased risk of both ischemic and bleeding complications. The optimal anticoagulation strategy in these patients is uncertain. Therefore, we compared bivalirudin to heparin monotherapy in a contemporary cohort of such patients. METHODS: A prespecified subgroup analysis of elderly patients with myocardial infarction (≥75 years) from the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial (Bivalirudin Versus Heparin in ST-Segment and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients on Modern Antiplatelet Therapy in the Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies Registry Trial) was performed. In the trial, patients were randomized to either bivalirudin or heparin monotherapy during percutaneous coronary intervention, with mandatory potent P2Y12 inhibition, routine radial artery access, and only bail-out glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibition. Kaplan-Meier event rates were assessed for the primary end point, consisting of a composite of all-cause death, myocardial reinfarction, or major bleeding, within 180 days. RESULTS: The elderly (n=1592) had more than twice the risk of all events compared with younger patients (n=4406). Baseline and periprocedural characteristics were equal between bivalirudin (n=799) and heparin (n=793) treated patients ≥75 years. No differences were found in the elderly between bivalirudin and heparin monotherapy regarding the primary end point (180-day all-cause death, myocardial reinfarction, or major bleeding), the individual components of the primary end point, definite stent thrombosis, or stroke. CONCLUSIONS: In this prespecified subgroup analysis of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial, elderly patients with myocardial infarction had a highly increased risk of all events. However, no difference in outcomes could be observed with an anticoagulation strategy with either bivalirudin or heparin as monotherapy in this patient group.

Impact of Baseline Anemia in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Prespecified Analysis From the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART Trial.

Background The impact of baseline anemia in a contemporary acute coronary syndrome (ACS) population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the era of predominant radial artery access, potent P2Y12 inhibition, and rare use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors has not been adequately studied. Methods and Results ACS patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention between 2014 and 2016 in the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART (Bivalirudin Versus Heparin in ST-Segment and Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Patients on Modern Antiplatelet Therapy in the Swedish Web System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies Registry) trial without missing values for hemoglobin were included (n=5482). Mortality, myocardial reinfarction, and major bleeding at 180 days were assessed using Cox regression models and propensity score matching. All studied comorbidities were more common in ACS patients who had anemia (n=792). ACS patients with anemia had higher rates of 180-day mortality (6.9% versus 2.1%; hazard ratio, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.3-2.7; P<0.001), myocardial reinfarction (4.3% versus 1.9%; hazard ratio, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.7; P=0.013), and major bleeding (13.4% versus 8.2%; hazard ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.6; P=0.041). The results were most evident in patients with a hemoglobin value <100 g/L, who had a nearly 10 times higher mortality rate. Conclusions Baseline anemia in ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, treated according to current practice including routine radial artery access, constitutes a high-risk feature for both ischemic events, bleeding events, and mortality. A multidisciplinary approach is warranted to maximize benefit and minimize patient risk. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02311231.