2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease." METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. STRUCTURE: This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease: A Report of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2023 AHA/ACC/ACCP/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Chronic Coronary Disease" provides an update to and consolidates new evidence since the "2012 ACCF/AHA/ACP/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease" and the corresponding "2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS Focused Update of the Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease." METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from September 2021 to May 2022. Clinical studies, systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other evidence conducted on human participants were identified that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. STRUCTURE: This guideline provides an evidenced-based and patient-centered approach to management of patients with chronic coronary disease, considering social determinants of health and incorporating the principles of shared decision-making and team-based care. Relevant topics include general approaches to treatment decisions, guideline-directed management and therapy to reduce symptoms and future cardiovascular events, decision-making pertaining to revascularization in patients with chronic coronary disease, recommendations for management in special populations, patient follow-up and monitoring, evidence gaps, and areas in need of future research. Where applicable, and based on availability of cost-effectiveness data, cost-value recommendations are also provided for clinicians. Many recommendations from previously published guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data.

Comparing eligibility for statin therapy for primary prevention under 2022 USPSTF recommendations and the 2018 AHA/ACC/ multi-society guideline recommendations: From National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.

INTRODUCTION: The United States Preventive Services Taskforce (USPSTF) recently released recommendations for statin therapy eligibility for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD). We report the proportion and the absolute number of US adults who would be eligible for statin therapy under these recommendations and compare them with the previously published 2018 American Heart Association (AHA)/ American College of Cardiology (ACC)/ Multisociety (MS) Cholesterol guidelines. METHODS: We used data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2017-2020 of adults aged 40-75 years without prevalent self-reported atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD) and low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol <190 mg/dL. The 2022 USPSTF recommends statin therapy for primary prevention in those with a 10-year ASCVD risk of ≥10% and ≥ 1 CVD risk factor (diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, hypertension, or smoking). The 2018 AHA/ ACC/ MS Cholesterol guideline recommends considering statin therapy for primary prevention for those with diabetes mellitus, or 10-year ASCVD risk ≥20% or 10-year ASCVD risk 7.5 to <20% after accounting for risk-enhancers and shared decision making. Survey recommended weights were used to project these proportions to national estimates. RESULTS: Among 1799 participants eligible for this study, the weighted mean age was 56.0 ± 0.5 years, with 53.0% women (95% confidence interval [CI] 49.7, 56.3), and 10.6% self-reported NH Black individuals (95% CI 7.7, 14.3). The weighted mean 10-year ASCVD risk was 9.6 ± 0.3%. The 2022 USPSTF recommendations and the 2018 AHA/ ACC/ MS Cholesterol guidelines indicated eligibility for statin therapy in 31.8% (95% CI 28.6, 35.1) and 46.8% (95% CI 43.0, 50.5) adults, respectively. These represent 33.7 million (95% CI 30.4, 37.2) and 49.7 million (95% CI 45.7, 53.7) adults, respectively. For those with diabetes mellitus, 2022 USPSTF recommended statin therapy in 63.0% (95% CI 52.1, 72.7) adults as compared with all adults with diabetes aged 40-75 years under the 2018 AHA/ ACC/ MS Cholesterol guidelines. CONCLUSION: In this analysis of the nationally representative US population from 2017 to 2020, approximately 15% (~16.0 million) fewer adults were eligible for statin therapy for primary prevention under the 2022 USPSTF recommendations as compared to the 2018 AHA/ ACC/ MS Cholesterol guideline.

JCL roundtable: Omega-3 fatty acids and cardiovascular outcomes.

The Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl-Intervention Trial (REDUCE-IT) in 2018 demonstrated the value of an omega-3 fatty acid formulation, icosapent ethyl (eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester) for preventive treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). This JCL Roundtable discussion brings together three experts to explore the origins and implications of REDUCE-IT and more broadly omega-3 fatty acids for mitigation of ASCVD risk. REDUCE-IT achieved a highly significant 25% reduction of major adverse cardiovascular events. It is the first trial of a triglyceride-lowering drug to gain unequivocal success in high-risk patients treated intensively with statins. It corroborates positive results from an earlier major trial using eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) ethyl ester, the Japan EPA Lipid Intervention Study (JELIS), which included hypercholesterolemic subjects treated with low-dose statin mostly in primary prevention. Together these studies mark a new avenue for preventive treatment of ASCVD. Omega-3 fatty acids also show some promise, though less decisively, for reducing inflammation and cardiovascular mortality in a broader context.

Analysis of vitamin D levels in patients with and without statin-associated myalgia - a systematic review and meta-analysis of 7 studies with 2420 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Vitamin D (vit D) deficiency may be associated with an increased risk of statin-related symptomatic myalgia in statin-treated patients. The aim of this meta-analysis was to substantiate the role of serum vitamin D levels in statin-associated myalgia. METHODS: The search included PUBMED, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and EMBASE from January 1, 1987 to April 1, 2014 to identify studies that investigated the impact of vit D levels in statin-treated subjects with and without myalgia. Two independent reviewers extracted data on study characteristics, methods and outcomes. Quantitative data synthesis was performed using a fixed-effect model. RESULTS: The electronic search yielded 437 articles; of those 20 were scrutinized as full texts and 13 studies were considered unsuitable. The final analysis included 7 studies with 2420 statin-treated patients divided into subgroups of patients with (n=666 [27.5%]) or without (n=1754) myalgia. Plasma vit D concentrations in the symptomatic and asymptomatic subgroups were 28.4±13.80ng/mL and 34.86±11.63ng/mL, respectively. The combination of data from individual observational studies showed that vit D plasma concentrations were significantly lower in patients with statin-associated myalgia compared with patients not manifesting this side effect (weighted mean difference -9.41ng/mL; 95% confidence interval: -10.17 to -8.64; p<0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis provides evidence that low vit D levels are associated with myalgia in patients on statin therapy. Randomized controlled trials are necessary to establish whether vitamin D supplementation reduces the risk for statin-associated myalgia.

Comparison of effectiveness of atorvastatin 10 mg versus 80 mg in reducing major cardiovascular events and repeat revascularization in patients with previous percutaneous coronary intervention (post hoc analysis of the Treating to New Targets [TNT] Study).

The Treating to New Targets (TNT) study demonstrated that intensive atorvastatin therapy to achieve low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations well below recommended target levels provides an incremental clinical benefit in patients with stable coronary artery disease. This post hoc analysis of the TNT study was conducted to investigate whether this benefit extends to patients with previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A total of 10,001 patients with clinically evident coronary artery disease, including 5,407 patients with previous PCI, were randomized to atorvastatin 10 or 80 mg/day and followed for a median of 4.9 years. The primary end point was the occurrence of a first major cardiovascular event. Revascularization, a component of a secondary end point, was also examined. In patients with previous PCI, mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels at study end were 79.5 mg/dl in the 80-mg arm and 100.8 mg/dl in the 10-mg arm. First major cardiovascular events occurred in 230 patients (8.6%) receiving high-dose atorvastatin and 289 patients (10.6%) receiving low-dose atorvastatin (hazard ratio 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.94, p = 0.008). Repeat revascularization during follow-up (PCI or coronary artery bypass grafting) was performed in 466 patients (17.3%) in the 80-mg arm and 624 patients (22.9%) in the 10-mg arm (hazard ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 0.82, p <0.0001). In conclusion, intensive lipid lowering to a mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level of 79.5 mg/dl (2.1 mmol/L) with atorvastatin 80 mg/day in patients with previous PCI reduces major cardiovascular events by 21% and repeat revascularizations by 27% compared with a less intensive lipid-lowering regimen.

Intensive lipid lowering with atorvastatin in patients with coronary artery disease, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of intensive lipid lowering with high-dose atorvastatin on the incidence of major cardiovascular events compared with low-dose atorvastatin in patients with coronary artery disease and type 2 diabetes, with and without chronic kidney disease (CKD). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Following 8 weeks' open-label therapy with atorvastatin (10 mg/d), 10,001 patients with coronary artery disease were randomized to receive double-blind therapy with either 80 mg/d or 10 mg/d of atorvastatin between July 1, 1998, and December 31, 1999. Of 1501 patients with diabetes, renal data were available for 1431. Patients with CKD were defined as having a baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) below 60 mL/min per 1.73 m2, using the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 4.8 years, 95 (17.4%) of 546 patients with diabetes and CKD experienced a major cardiovascular event vs 119 (13.4%) of 885 patients with diabetes and normal eGFRs (hazard ratio [HR], 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.72; P<.05). Compared with 10 mg of atorvastatin, 80 mg of atorvastatin reduced the relative risk of major cardiovascular events by 35% in patients with diabetes and CKD (20.9% [57/273] vs 13.9% [38/273]; HR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.43-0.98; P=.04) and by 10% in patients with diabetes and normal eGFR (14.1% [62/441] vs 12.8% [57/444]; HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.63-1.29; P=.56). The absolute risk reduction in patients with diabetes and CKD was substantial, yielding a number needed to treat of 14 to prevent 1 major cardiovascular event over 4.8 years. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Patients with diabetes, stable coronary artery disease, and mild to moderate CKD experience marked reduction in cardiovascular events with intensive lipid lowering, in contrast to previous observations in patients with diabetes and end-stage renal disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00327691.

Outcomes of using high- or low-dose atorvastatin in patients 65 years of age or older with stable coronary heart disease.

BACKGROUND: Increased life expectancy is associated with an increase in the burden of chronic cardiovascular disease. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of high-dose atorvastatin in patients 65 years of age or older. DESIGN: A prespecified secondary analysis of the Treating to New Targets study, a randomized, double-blind clinical trial. SETTING: 256 sites in 14 countries participating in the Treating to New Targets study. PARTICIPANTS: 10,001 patients (3809 patients > or =65 years of age) with coronary heart disease (CHD) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels less than 3.4 mmol/L (<130 mg/dL). INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to receive atorvastatin, 10 or 80 mg/d. MEASUREMENTS: The primary end point was the occurrence of a first major cardiovascular event (death from CHD, nonfatal non-procedure-related myocardial infarction, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or fatal or nonfatal stroke). RESULTS: In patients 65 years of age or older, absolute risk was reduced by 2.3% and relative risk by 19% for major cardiovascular events in favor of the high-dose atorvastatin group (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.67 to 0.98]; P = 0.032). Among the components of the composite outcome, the mortality rates from CHD, nonfatal non-procedure-related myocardial infarction, and fatal or nonfatal stroke (ischemic, embolic, hemorrhagic, or unknown origin) were all lower in older patients who received high-dose atorvastatin, although the difference was not statistically significant for each individual component. The improved clinical outcome in patients 65 years of age or older was not associated with persistent elevations in creatine kinase levels. LIMITATION: Because the study was a secondary analysis, the findings should be interpreted within the context of the main study results. CONCLUSIONS: The analysis suggests that additional clinical benefit can be achieved by treating older patients with CHD more aggressively to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels to less than 2.6 mmol/L (<100 mg/dL). The findings support the use of intensive low-density lipoprotein cholesterol-lowering therapy in high-risk older persons with established cardiovascular disease. Click here for related information on atorvastatin.

Effect of high-dose atorvastatin on hospitalizations for heart failure: subgroup analysis of the Treating to New Targets (TNT) study.

BACKGROUND: Statins reduce the rate of major cardiovascular events in high-risk patients, but their potential benefit as treatment for heart failure (HF) is less clear. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n=10,001) with stable coronary disease were randomized to treatment with atorvastatin 80 or 10 mg/d and followed up for a median of 4.9 years. A history of HF was present in 7.8% of patients. A known ejection fraction <30% and advanced HF were exclusion criteria for the study. A predefined secondary end point of the study was hospitalization for HF. The incidence of hospitalization for HF was 2.4% in the 80-mg arm and 3.3% in the 10-mg arm (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 0.94; P=0.0116). The treatment effect of the higher dose was more marked in patients with a history of HF: 17.3% versus 10.6% in the 10- and 80-mg arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.4 to 0.88; P=0.009). Among patients without a history of HF, the rates of hospitalization for HF were much lower: 1.8% in the 80-mg group and 2.0% in the 10-mg group (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.64 to 1.16; P=0.34). Only one third of patients hospitalized for HF had evidence of preceding angina or myocardial infarction during the study period. Blood pressure was almost identical during follow-up in the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with a lower dose, intensive treatment with atorvastatin in patients with stable coronary disease significantly reduces hospitalizations for HF. In a post hoc analysis, this benefit was observed only in patients with a history of HF. The mechanism accounting for this benefit is unlikely to be due primarily to a reduction in interim coronary events or differences in blood pressure.

Dietitian services are associated with improved patient outcomes and the MEDFICTS dietary assessment questionnaire is a suitable outcome measure in cardiac rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study were to (a) examine the effectiveness of registered dietitian (RD) education and counseling on diet-related patient outcomes compared with general education provided by the cardiac rehabilitation (CR) staff, and (b) evaluate the effectiveness of the Meats, Eggs, Dairy, Fried foods, In baked goods, Convenience foods, Table fats, Snacks (MEDFICTS) score as an outcome measure in CR. METHODS: Observational study data examined from 426 CR patients discharged between January 1996 and February 2004. Groups were formed based on education source: (a) RD and (b) general education from CR staff. Baseline characteristics were compared between groups; pre/post diet-related outcomes (lipids, waist circumference, body mass index, MEDFICTS score) were compared within groups. Controlling for baseline measures and lipid-lowering medication, associations were examined between (a) RD education and diet-related outcomes and (b) ending MEDFICTS score and diet-related outcomes. RESULTS: Mean age was 62+/-11 years, 30% of patients were female, and 28% were nonwhite. At baseline, the RD group (n=359) had more dyslipidemia (88% vs 76%), more obesity (47% vs 27%), a larger waist (40+/-6 vs 37+/-5 inches), a higher body mass index (calculated as kg/m(2); 30+/-6 vs 27+/-5), a higher diet score (32+/-28 vs 19+/-19), and lower self-reported physical activity (7+/-12 vs 13+/-18 metabolic equivalent hours) (all P<.05) than the general education group (n=67). RD education was associated with improved low-density lipoprotein (r=0.13; P=.04), triglycerides (r=0.48; P=.01), and MEDFICTS score (r=0.18; P=.01). Improvements in MEDFICTS scores were correlated with improved total cholesterol, triglycerides, and waist measurements (all r=0.19; P=.04). CONCLUSIONS: Dietary education by an RD is associated with improved diet-related outcomes. The MEDFICTS score is a suitable outcome measure in CR.

Effects of hormone replacement therapy and antioxidant vitamin supplements on coronary atherosclerosis in postmenopausal women: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and antioxidant vitamins are widely used for secondary prevention in postmenopausal women with coronary disease, but no clinical trials have demonstrated benefit to support their use. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether HRT or antioxidant vitamin supplements, alone or in combination, influence the progression of coronary artery disease in postmenopausal women, as measured by serial quantitative coronary angiography. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: The Women's Angiographic Vitamin and Estrogen (WAVE) Trial, a randomized, double-blind trial of 423 postmenopausal women with at least one 15% to 75% coronary stenosis at baseline coronary angiography. The trial was conducted from July 1997 to January 2002 in 7 clinical centers in the United States and Canada. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned in a 2 x 2 factorial design to receive either 0.625 mg/d of conjugated equine estrogen (plus 2.5 mg/d of medroxyprogesterone acetate for women who had not had a hysterectomy), or matching placebo, and 400 IU of vitamin E twice daily plus 500 mg of vitamin C twice daily, or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Annualized mean (SD) change in minimum lumen diameter (MLD) from baseline to concluding angiogram of all qualifying coronary lesions averaged for each patient. Patients with intercurrent death or myocardial infarction (MI) were imputed the worst rank of angiographic outcome. RESULTS: The mean (SD) interval between angiograms was 2.8 (0.9) years. Coronary progression, measured in mean (SD) change, worsened with HRT by 0.047 (0.15) mm/y and by 0.024 (0.15) mm/y with HRT placebo (P =.17); and for antioxidant vitamins by 0.044 (0.15) mm/y and with vitamin placebo by 0.028 (0.15) mm/y (P =.32). When patients with intercurrent death or MI were included, the primary outcome showed an increased risk for women in the active HRT group (P =.045), and suggested an increased risk in the active vitamin group (P =.09). Fourteen patients died in the HRT group and 8 in the HRT placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-4.3), and 16 in the vitamin group and 6 in the vitamin placebo group (HR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1-7.2). Death, nonfatal MI, or stroke occurred in 26 HRT patients vs 15 HRT controls (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 0.97-3.6) and in 26 vitamin patients and 18 vitamin controls (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 0.80-2.9). There was no interaction between the 2 treatment interventions. CONCLUSION: In postmenopausal women with coronary disease, neither HRT nor antioxidant vitamin supplements provide cardiovascular benefit. Instead, a potential for harm was suggested with each treatment.