Cost Analysis of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Computed Tomography in Cardiology: A Case Study of a University Hospital Complex in the Euro Region.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, several hospitals have incorporated MRI equipment managed directly by their cardiology departments. The aim of our work is to determine the total cost per test of both CT and MRI in the setting of a Cardiology Department of a tertiary hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The process followed for estimating the costs of CT and MRI tests consists of three phases: (1) Identification of the phases of the testing process; (2) Identification of the resources consumed in carrying out the tests; (3) Quantification and assessment of inputs. RESULTS: MRI involves higher personnel (EUR 66.03 vs. EUR 49.17) and equipment (EUR 89.98 vs. EUR 33.73) costs, while CT consumes higher expenditures in consumables (EUR 93.28 vs. EUR 22.95) and overheads (EUR 1.64 vs. EUR 1.55). The total cost of performing each test is higher in MRI (EUR 180.60 vs. EUR 177.73). CONCLUSIONS: We can conclude that the unit cost of each CT and MRI performed in that unit are EUR 177.73 and EUR 180.60, respectively, attributable to consumables in the case of CT and to amortization of equipment and staff time in the case of MRI.

Economic Burden Associated with the Treatment with a Cardiovascular Polypill in Secondary Prevention in Spain: Cost-Effectiveness Results of the NEPTUNO Study.

Purpose: The aim of this study was to estimate health-care resources utilization, costs and cost-effectiveness associated with the treatment with CNIC-Polypill as secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) compared to other treatments, in clinical practice in Spain. Patients and Methods: An observational, retrospective study was performed using medical records (economic results [healthcare perspective], NEPTUNO-study; BIG-PAC-database) of patients who initiated secondary prevention between 2015 and 2018. Patients were followed up to 2 years (maximum). Four cohorts were balanced with a propensity-score-matching (PSM): 1) CNIC-Polypill (aspirin+atorvastatin+ramipril), 2) Monocomponents (same separate drugs), 3) Equipotent (equipotent drugs) and 4) Other therapies ([OT], other cardiovascular drugs). Incidence of cardiovascular events, health-care resources utilization and healthcare and non-healthcare costs (2020 Euros) were compared. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios per cardiovascular event avoided were estimated. Results: After PSM, 1614 patients were recruited in each study cohort. The accumulated incidence of cardiovascular events during the 24-month follow-up was lower in the CNIC-Polypill cohort vs the other cohorts (19.8% vs Monocomponents: 23.3%, Equipotent: 25.5% and OT: 26.8%; p<0.01). During the follow-up period, the CNIC-Polypill cohort also reduced the health-care resources utilization per patient compared to the other cohorts, particularly primary care visits (16.6 vs Monocomponents: 18.7, Equipotent: 18.9 and OT: 21.0; p<0.001) and hospitalization days (2.3 vs Monocomponents: 3.4, Equipotent: 3.7 and OT: 4.0; p<0.001). The treatment cost in the CNIC-Polypill cohort was lower than that in the other cohorts (€4668 vs Monocomponents: €5587; Equipotent: €5682 and OT: €6016; p<0.001) (Difference: -€919, -€1014 and -€1348, respectively). Due to the reduction of cardiovascular events and costs, the CNIC-Polypill is a dominant alternative compared to the other treatments. Conclusion: CNIC-Polypill reduces recurrent major cardiovascular events and costs, being a cost-saving strategy as secondary prevention of ASCVD.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of patiromer for the treatment of hyperkalemia in chronic kidney disease patients with and without heart failure in Spain.

AIMS: Renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAASi) therapy is commonly used to reduce the risk of death and to slow down disease progression in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), heart failure (HF) and hypertension. However, the cardio-renal benefits of RAASi therapy are also associated with an increased risk of hyperkalemia (HK), which may lead to dose reduction or discontinuation of therapy. Patiromer has demonstrated to reduce the risk of HK, which enables to maintain optimal doses of RAASi therapy. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of patiromer for the management of HK in CKD patients with and without HF in Spain. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to evaluate the costs and benefits of patiromer for the management of HK in patients with CKD stages 3-4 with and without HF treated with RAASi over a lifetime horizon. The main outcomes included total direct costs (€2021), quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), life-years gained (LYG) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Deterministic one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the results. RESULTS: Patiromer was more effective compared to no patiromer (5.76 vs 5.57 QALYs; 7.73 vs 7.50 LYG), and resulted in an incremental cost of €3,574, yielding an ICER of €19,092/QALY gained and of €15,236/LYG. Sensitivity analyses suggested that the results were robust to changes in most input parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Patiromer is a cost-effective intervention in maintaining normokalemia and enabling optimal RAASi therapy in patients with CKD stages 3-4 with and without HF in Spain.

Proportion of High-Risk/Very High-Risk Patients in Europe with Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol at Target According to European Guidelines: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Assess achievement of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) targets in European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) guidelines. DESIGN: Systematic literature review. DATA SOURCES: Medline, EMBASE, Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Observational studies reporting LDL-C levels/target attainment, measured between 1 August 2006 to 31 August 2017, in European adults with established cardiovascular disease (CVD), diabetes with target organ damage, familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH) or 10-year risk of fatal CVD ≥ 5% (assessed by Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation [SCORE]). DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two reviewers independently extracted relevant studies and assessed study quality using the Risk of Bias for Non-Randomised Studies-Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. Primary outcome was the proportion of patients achieving LDL-C targets in the 2011/2016 ESC/EAS guidelines. Where available, patient characteristics were presented as means weighted by sample size. The proportions of patients achieving LDL-C targets in the 5 years before and after publication of the 2011 guidelines were compared using a chi-square test. RESULTS: Across 81 eligible studies (303,534 patients), achievement of LDL-C < 1.8 mmol/L was poor among patients with established CVD (16%; range 9-56%) and at very high risk of CVD (SCORE ≥ 10% [18%; 14-25%]). In individuals with FH, SCORE 5-10%, or diabetes and target organ damage, LDL-C < 2.5 mmol/L was achieved by 15% (9-22%), 46% (21-55%) and 13% (6-34%), respectively. Comparing the 5 years before/after publication of the 2011 guidelines, target achievement increased significantly over time but remained suboptimal (LDL-C < 1.8, 22% versus 15%; LDL-C < 2.5, 68% versus 61%; both p < 0.001; established CVD group only). CONCLUSIONS: These data show suboptimal LDL-C control among European patients at high risk of CVD. Those at greatest overall risk (clinically established CVD or at least a 10% 10-year risk of fatal CVD) had the lowest achievement of 2011/2016 EAS/ESC LDL-C targets. With lower LDL-C targets advocated in 2019 ESC/EAS guidelines, this unmet need will increase. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number; CRD77844.

Efficacy and Safety of Clopidogrel, Prasugrel and Ticagrelor in ACS Patients Treated with PCI: A Propensity Score Analysis of the RENAMI and BleeMACS Registries.

INTRODUCTION: Real-life data comparing clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor for unselected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are lacking, as are data for the temporal distribution of ischemic and bleeding risks. METHODS: A total of 19,825 patients were enrolled from the RENAMI and BleeMACS registries. Both were multicenter, retrospective, observational registries including the data and outcomes of consecutive patients with ACS who underwent primary PCI and were discharged with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). We evaluated the long-term outcome stratified by the different antiplatelet agents. RESULTS: A total of 14,105 patients (71.2%) were treated with clopidogrel, 2364 patients (11.9%) with prasugrel and 3356 patients (16.9%) with ticagrelor. After propensity score matching, at 1 year, prasugrel reduced the incidence of net adverse clinical events (NACE; a composite endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction [MI] and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] 3-5 bleeding) (4.2% vs.7.6%, p = 0.002) and of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; a composite endpoint of death and MI) compared with clopidogrel (2.6% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.007). Ticagrelor decreased rates of MACE compared with clopidogrel (2.7% vs. 6.2%, p < 0.001), but not of NACE (6.6% vs. 8.7%, p = 0.07). Ticagrelor presented similar performance in terms of MACE compared with prasugrel (2.8% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.56), with a trend towards a reduction in MI (0.2% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.56), but with higher risk of BARC 3-5 bleedings (3.8% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.04). In the daily risk analysis, clopidogrel presented a binomial distribution with a peak of ischemic risk at 3 months, which decreased towards bleedings; prasugrel had a constant equivalence between opposite risks; and ticagrelor constantly reduced recurrent MIs despite higher risk of BARC 3-5 events. CONCLUSION: In real life, ticagrelor is more effective in reducing ischemic events during the first year after ACS, despite an increased risk of major bleedings, while prasugrel assures a better balance between ischemic and bleeding recurrent events.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Apixaban Versus Edoxaban in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation for Stroke Prevention.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to assess the cost effectiveness of apixaban versus edoxaban in the prevention of stroke and systemic embolism (SE) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in Spain. METHODS: We customized a Markov model with ten health states to estimate the lifetime economic and clinical outcomes in 6-week cycles. The efficacy (clinical event rates per 100 patient-years) and safety data were derived from a pairwise indirect treatment comparison. The analysis was conducted from both the national health service (NHS) and societal perspectives, and included pharmaceutical costs (retail price plus value-added tax (VAT) and applicable national deductions) according to daily dosages (apixaban 10 mg (5 mg twice daily (bid)) and edoxaban 60 or 30 mg) and complications and disease-management costs, obtained from national databases. Utilities for quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) calculations reflected EuroQoL 5-Dimension scores in patients with AF. An annual discount rate of 3% was applied for costs (€, year 2019 values) and outcomes. RESULTS: In a 1000-patient cohort, apixaban 5 mg bid versus edoxaban 60 mg could avoid five strokes, six major bleedings and 29 clinically relevant non-major bleedings (CRNMBs). Compared with edoxaban 30 mg, apixaban could avoid 21 strokes and two SEs. An increase in bleedings was observed with apixaban (seven haemorrhagic strokes, 48 major bleedings and 17 CRNMBs). Apixaban yielded 0.04 additional QALYs compared with edoxaban 60 mg or 30 mg. Incremental costs/QALY were €9639.33 and €354.22 for apixaban versus edoxaban 60 mg and edoxaban 30 mg, respectively, from the NHS perspective and €7756.62 for apixaban versus edoxaban 60 mg from the societal perspective. Apixaban was dominant versus edoxaban 30 mg from the societal perspective. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the model. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that apixaban 5 mg bid is a cost-effective alternative to edoxaban for stroke prevention in the AF population in Spain.

Quantitative assessment of left ventricular size and function in cardiac transplant recipients: Side-by-side comparison of real time two-dimensional echocardiography, contrast-enhanced two-dimensional echocardiography, three-dimensional echocardiography, and contrast-enhanced three-dimensional echocardiography as compared to magnetic resonance imaging.

INTRODUCTION: We evaluate the ability of 2D non-contrast-enhanced echocardiography (CE-echo), 2DCE-echo, 3D-echo, 3D non-CE-echo, and 3DCE-echo to evaluate allograft function and dimensions in orthotropic heart transplantation (OHT). Cardiac resonance (CMR) was used as reference. METHODS: Twenty six consecutive OHT-recipients were prospectively recruited. Bland-Altman, Spearman rank, and concordance-correlation coefficients (CCC) were determined. RESULTS: Good CCCs were found between the four modalities and CMR for ejection fraction (r ≥ 0.72/P < 0.001; r ≥ 0.77/ P < 0.001; r ≥ 0.51/ P < 0.23; r ≥ 0.75/ P < 0.001, respectively). Highest intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was for 2D CE-echo(CCC = 0.77). End-diastolic volume(EDV) measurements statistically differed when 2D non-CE-echo, 2DCE-echo, and 3D non-CE-echo were compared with the cross-sectional imaging modalities, but they did not differ significantly from 3DCE-echo. End-systolic volume (ESV) and stroke volume (SV) differed statistically between the four modalities; however, SV measured by CMR and 3DCE-echo were comparable. Overall, 2D non-CE-echo, 2DCE-echo, and 3D non-CE-echo showed lower mean EDV, ESV, and SV than CMR. ICC was that of the ESV variable in the 4 techniques, with the values of the ICC of the 3DCE-echo technique superior to the rest. Overall, the best CCC were found for 3DCE(r = 0.88, 0.92 and 0.76 for EDV, ESV and SV, respectively). CONCLUSION: Routine use of 3DCE-echo may allow more comprehensive cardiac assessment in cardiac transplant recipients.

Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in coronary chronic total occlusions revascularization: safety assessment related to struts coverage and apposition in 6-month OCT follow-up.

Beneficial properties of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) regarding to vasomotility restoration and no caging of the vessel make them attractive devices in chronic total occlusions (CTO) revascularization. However, more evidence is needed attending to their use in this specific setting. We aim to determine feasibility and safety of BVS use in CTO revascularization attending to struts coverage and apposition, as well as re-stenosis and stent thrombosis (ST) rates. 29 BVS were deployed in 9 CTO lesions revascularization (mean J-CTO score ≥3) with an acute procedural success rate of 100%. Clinical and angiographic follow-up was performed 6 months later, including intracoronary analyses from optical coherence tomography (OCT) images. 44,723 struts were analyzed within the total 636 mm of scaffolded vessel. Mean length scaffolded per lesion was 70.66 ± 31.01 mm with a mean number of 3.22 BVS. 2051 struts (4.59%) were identified as uncovered, being most of them (98.4%) neither malapposed nor disrupted. Mean thickness of struts' coverage was 0.13 ± 0.05 mm. Incomplete strut apposition (ISA) percentage was 0% as no malapposed struts were detected and 134 struts were identified as disrupted, which represents a 0.29% from the total. Mean vessel, scaffold, and lumen diameters were 3.87 ± 0.51, 2.97 ± 0.49, and 2.68 ± 0.50 mm, respectively. Neither in-stent re-stenosis nor ST was detected. During follow-up, none of our patients died, suffered from stroke or needed target lesion revascularization. Clinical and angiographic 6-month follow-up (including OCT analyses) of BVS in CTO revascularization suggests their effectiveness and safety, even in very complex chronic occluded lesions. Nevertheless, more evidence is needed.

Cost-effectiveness of a cascade screening program for the early detection of familial hypercholesterolemia.

BACKGROUND: Although familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) confers a high risk of coronary artery disease, most patients are undiagnosed, and little is known about the efficiency of genetic cascade screening programs at national level. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of a national genetic cascade screening program in Spain. METHODS: An economic evaluation was performed using a decision tree analysis. The choice in the decision tree was between implementation of the national program for FH (NPFH) or keeping the usual clinical care. The NPFH detects FH patients through total cholesterol measurement at primary care level and use of genetic testing in index cases and relatives. The payer (National Health System) and social (including the productivity lost) perspectives were considered. The outcome variables were coronary events avoided, deaths avoided, and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. RESULTS: From the payer perspective, the application of the NPFH during 1 year prevents 847 coronary events and 203 deaths in the 9000 FH patients cohort during a 10-year follow-up, yielding an extra 767 QALYs, at a cost of €29,608 per QALY gained. From the social perspective, the NPFH is dominant over the control (the cost decreases and the effectiveness increases). The sensitivity analysis confirms the robustness of the findings. CONCLUSION: The NPFH based on molecular testing is a cost-effective diagnostic and management strategy that supports government expenditure aimed at preventing coronary artery disease in FH patients in Spain. Implementation of such a strategy is likely to be also cost-effective in countries with similar developed healthcare systems.

Renal function assessment in atrial fibrillation: Usefulness of chronic kidney disease epidemiology collaboration vs re-expressed 4 variable modification of diet in renal disease.

AIM: To compare the performance of the re-expressed Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation vs the new Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. METHODS: We studied 911 consecutive patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation on vitamin-K antagonist. The performance of the re-expressed Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation vs the new Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation with respect to either a composite endpoint of major bleeding, thromboembolic events and all-cause mortality or each individual component of the composite endpoint was assessed using continuous and categorical ≥ 60, 59-30, and < 30 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) estimated glomerular filtration rate. RESULTS: During 10 ± 3 mo, the composite endpoint occurred in 98 (10.8%) patients: 30 patients developed major bleeding, 18 had thromboembolic events, and 60 died. The new equation provided lower prevalence of renal dysfunction < 60 mL/min per 1.73 m(2) (32.9%), compared with the re-expressed equation (34.1%). Estimated glomerular filtration rate from both equations was independent predictor of composite endpoint (HR = 0.98 and 0.97 for the re-expressed and the new equation, respectively; P < 0.0001) and all-cause mortality (HR = 0.98 for both equations, P < 0.01). Strong association with thromboembolic events was observed only when estimated glomerular filtration rate was < 30 mL/min per 1.73 m(2): HR is 5.1 for the re-expressed equation, and HR = 5.0 for the new equation. No significant association with major bleeding was observed for both equations. CONCLUSION: The new equation reduced the prevalence of renal dysfunction. Both equations performed similarly in predicting major adverse outcomes.

[Spanish Interdisciplinary Committee for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and the Spanish Society of Cardiology Position Statement on Dyslipidemia Management. Differences Between the European and American Guidelines]. / Posicionamiento del Comité Español Interdisciplinario de Prevención Cardiovascular y la Sociedad Española de Cardiología en el tratamiento de las dislipemias. Divergencia entre las guías europea y estadounidense.

The publication of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines on the treatment of high blood cholesterol has had a strong impact due to the paradigm shift in its recommendations. The Spanish Interdisciplinary Committee for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and the Spanish Society of Cardiology reviewed this guideline and compared it with current European guidelines on cardiovascular prevention and dyslipidemia management. The most striking aspect of the American guideline is the elimination of the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol treat-to-target strategy and the adoption of a risk reduction strategy in 4 major statin benefit groups. In patients with established cardiovascular disease, both guidelines recommend a similar therapeutic strategy (high-dose potent statins). However, in primary prevention, the application of the American guidelines would substantially increase the number of persons, particularly older people, receiving statin therapy. The elimination of the cholesterol treat-to-target strategy, so strongly rooted in the scientific community, could have a negative impact on clinical practice, create a certain amount of confusion and uncertainty among professionals, and decrease follow-up and patient adherence. Thus, this article reaffirms the recommendations of the European guidelines. Although both guidelines have positive aspects, doubt remains regarding the concerns outlined above. In addition to using risk charts based on the native population, the messages of the European guideline are more appropriate to the Spanish setting and avoid the possible risk of overtreatment with statins in primary prevention.

Spanish Interdisciplinary Committee for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and the Spanish Society of Cardiology Position Statement on Dyslipidemia Management: differences between the European and American Guidelines.

The publication of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines on the treatment of high blood cholesterol has had a strong impact due to the paradigm shift in its recommendations. The Spanish Interdisciplinary Committee for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and the Spanish Society of Cardiology reviewed this guideline and compared it with current European guidelines on cardiovascular prevention and dyslipidemia management. The most striking aspect of the American guideline is the elimination of the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol treat-to-target strategy and the adoption of a risk reduction strategy in 4 major statin benefit groups. In patients with established cardiovascular disease, both guidelines recommend a similar therapeutic strategy (high-dose potent statins). However, in primary prevention, the application of the American guidelines would substantially increase the number of persons, particularly older people, receiving statin therapy. The elimination of the cholesterol treat-to-target strategy, so strongly rooted in the scientific community, could have a negative impact on clinical practice, create a certain amount of confusion and uncertainty among professionals, and decrease follow-up and patient adherence. Thus, this article reaffirms the recommendations of the European guidelines. Although both guidelines have positive aspects, doubt remains regarding the concerns outlined above. In addition to using risk charts based on the native population, the messages of the European guideline are more appropriate to the Spanish setting and avoid the possible risk of overtreatment with statins in primary prevention.

[Spanish Interdisciplinary Committee for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and the Spanish Society of Cardiology position statement on dyslipidemia management. Differences between the European and American guidelines]. / Posicionamiento del comité español interdisciplinario de prevención cardiovascular y la sociedad española de cardiología en el tratamiento de las dislipemias. divergencia entre las guías europea y estadounidense.

The publication of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines on the treatment of high blood cholesterol has had a strong impact due to the paradigm shift in its recommendations. The Spanish Interdisciplinary Committee for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and the Spanish Society of Cardiology reviewed this guideline and compared it with current European guidelines on cardiovascular prevention and dyslipidemia management. The most striking aspect of the American guideline is the elimination of the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol treat-to-target strategy and the adoption of a risk reduction strategy in 4 major statin benefit groups. In patients with established cardiovascular disease, both guidelines recommend a similar therapeutic strategy (high-dose potent statins). However, in primary prevention, the application of the American guidelines would substantially increase the number of persons, particularly older people, receiving statin therapy. The elimination of the cholesterol treat-to-target strategy, so strongly rooted in the scientific community, could have a negative impact on clinical practice, create a certain amount of confusion and uncertainty among professionals, and decrease follow-up and patient adherence. Thus, this article reaffirms the recommendations of the European guidelines. Although both guidelines have positive aspects, doubt remains regarding the concerns outlined above. In addition to using risk charts based on the native population, the messages of the European guideline are more appropriate to the Spanish setting and avoid the possible risk of overtreatment with statins in primary prevention. Full English text available from:www.revespcardiol.org/en.

[Spanish interdisciplinary committee for cardiovascular disease prevention and the spanish society of cardiology position statement on dyslipidemia management. Differences between the European and american guidelines]. / Posicionamiento del Comité Español Interdisciplinario de Prevención Cardiovascular y la Sociedad Española de Cardiología en el tratamiento de las dislipemias. Divergencia entre las guías europea y estadounidense.

The publication of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines on the treatment of high blood cholesterol has had a strong impact due to the paradigm shift in its recommendations. The Spanish Interdisciplinary Committee for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and the Spanish Society of Cardiology reviewed this guideline and compared it with current European guidelines on cardiovascular prevention and dyslipidemia management. The most striking aspect of the American guideline is the elimination of the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol treat-to-target strategy and the adoption of a risk reduction strategy in 4 major statin benefit groups. In patients with established cardiovascular disease, both guidelines recommend a similar therapeutic strategy (high-dose potent statins). However, in primary prevention, the application of the American guidelines would substantially increase the number of persons, particularly older people, receiving statin therapy. The elimination of the cholesterol treat-to-target strategy, so strongly rooted in the scientific community, could have a negative impact on clinical practice, create a certain amount of confusion and uncertainty among professionals, and decrease follow-up and patient adherence. Thus, this article reaffirms the recommendations of the European guidelines. Although both guidelines have positive aspects, doubt remains regarding the concerns outlined above. In addition to using risk charts based on the native population, the messages of the European guideline are more appropriate to the Spanish setting and avoid the possible risk of overtreatment with statins in primary prevention.

Spanish Interdisciplinary Committee for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and the Spanish Society of Cardiology position statement on dyslipidemia management. Differences between the European and American guidelines.

The publication of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines on the treatment of high blood cholesterol has had a strong impact due to the paradigm shift in its recommendations. The Spanish Interdisciplinary Committee for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and the Spanish Society of Cardiology reviewed this guideline and compared it with current European guidelines on cardiovascular prevention and dyslipidemia management. The most striking aspect of the American guideline is the elimination of the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol treat-to-target strategy and the adoption of a risk reduction strategy in 4 major statin benefit groups. In patients with established cardiovascular disease, both guidelines recommend a similar therapeutic strategy (high-dose potent statins). However, in primary prevention, the application of the American guidelines would substantially increase the number of persons, particularly older people, receiving statin therapy. The elimination of the cholesterol treat-to-target strategy, so strongly rooted in the scientific community, could have a negative impact on clinical practice, create a certain amount of confusion and uncertainty among professionals, and decrease follow-up and patient adherence. Thus, this article reaffirms the recommendations of the European guidelines. Although both guidelines have positive aspects, doubt remains regarding the concerns outlined above. In addition to using risk charts based on the native population, the messages of the European guideline are more appropriate to the Spanish setting and avoid the possible risk of overtreatment with statins in primary prevention.

Discrepancy between stress electrocardiographic changes and nuclear myocardial perfusion defects in the prognostic assessment of patients with chest pain.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to determine the long-term prognostic value provided by the exercise electrocardiographic (ECG) response to nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) in the evaluation of patients with chest pain, focusing on patients with a discrepancy between the two tests. METHODS: A total of 1460 consecutive patients (777 female; 62.6 ± 11.4 years) undergoing exercise myocardial single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) were included. The endpoint was the occurrence of acute coronary syndrome, heart failure or cardiac death during follow-up. RESULTS: Ischemic ECG changes were observed during stress testing in 271 patients (18.5%) and 362 patients (24.7%) had positive (abnormal) exercise MPI results. There was a discrepancy between ECG and SPECT findings in 471 patients (32.2%). During the follow-up period (14.0-39.6 months), 224 patients (15.3%) presented cardiac events. The hazard ratios (HR) of ECG and MPI results to predict events were 1.506 (95% CI: 1.113-2.039) and 10.481 (95% CI: 7.799-14.080), respectively. In patients with negative MPI, the ECG response did not predict events (HR 1.214 [95% CI: 0.646-2.282]), the same as in patients with positive MPI (HR 1.203 [95% CI: 0.848-1.705]). Only in hypertensive patients with positive SPECT did the ECG show significant prognostic value (HR 1.937 [95% CI: 1.030-3.642]). In multivariate analysis, positive MPI proved an independent long-term prognostic factor (HR 10.536 [95% CI: 7.759-14.308]), but not ECG (HR 1.356 [95% CI: 0.994-1.850]). CONCLUSION: MPI results (normal vs. abnormal) had strong predictive value and discrepant ECG results had no significant additive prognostic value.