Championing nurse-led services for cardiology patients.

Alison Pottle, Consultant Nurse, Cardiology, Harefield Hospital, London (A.Pottle@rbht.nhs.uk), was the winner of the Silver Award in the Cardiovascular Nurse of the Year Category in the BJN Awards 2023.

Apheresis as novel treatment for refractory angina with raised lipoprotein(a): a randomized controlled cross-over trial.

AIMS: To determine the clinical impact of lipoprotein apheresis in patients with refractory angina and raised lipoprotein(a) > 500 mg/L on the primary end point of quantitative myocardial perfusion, as well as secondary end points including atheroma burden, exercise capacity, symptoms, and quality of life. METHODS: We conducted a single-blinded randomized controlled trial in 20 patients with refractory angina and raised lipoprotein(a) > 500 mg/L, with 3 months of blinded weekly lipoprotein apheresis or sham, followed by crossover. The primary endpoint was change in quantitative myocardial perfusion reserve (MPR) assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Secondary endpoints included measures of atheroma burden, exercise capacity, symptoms and quality of life. RESULTS: The primary endpoint, namely MPR, increased following apheresis (0.47; 95% CI 0.31-0.63) compared with sham (-0.16; 95% CI - 0.33-0.02) yielding a net treatment increase of 0.63 (95% CI 0.37-0.89; P < 0.001 between groups). Improvements with apheresis compared with sham also occurred in atherosclerotic burden as assessed by total carotid wall volume (P < 0.001), exercise capacity by the 6 min walk test (P = 0.001), 4 of 5 domains of the Seattle angina questionnaire (all P < 0.02) and quality of life physical component summary by the short form 36 survey (P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Lipoprotein apheresis may represent an effective novel treatment for patients with refractory angina and raised lipoprotein(a) improving myocardial perfusion, atheroma burden, exercise capacity and symptoms.

Mindfulness-based intervention in patients with persistent pain in chest (MIPIC) of non-cardiac cause: a feasibility randomised control study.

OBJECTIVE: The study evaluated the feasibility of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) in patients with non-cardiac chest pain by assessing their willingness to participate and adhere to the programme, and for these data to help further refine the content of MBCT for chest pain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This prospective 2:1 randomised controlled trial compared the intervention of adapted MBCT as an addition to usual care with just usual care in controls. Among 573 patients who attended the rapid access chest pain clinic over the previous 12 months and were not diagnosed with a cardiac cause but had persistent chest pain were invited. The intervention was a 2-hour, weekly, online guided 8-week MBCT course. Compliance with attendance and the home practice was recorded. Enrolled patients completed the Seattle angina questionnaire (SAQ), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Cardiac Anxiety Questionnaire, Five-Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire, and Euro Quality of Life-5 Dimensions-5 Level at baseline assessment and after 8-week period. RESULTS: Persistent chest pain was reported by 114 patients. Of these, 33 (29%) patients with a mean age of 54.2 (±12.2) years and 68% women, consented to the study. Baseline questionnaires revealed mild physical limitation (mean SAQ, 76.8±25), high levels of anxiety (76%) and depression (53%), modest cardiac anxiety (CAQ,1.78±0.61) and mindfulness score (FFMQ, 45.5±7.3). Six patients subsequently withdrew due to bereavement, caring responsibilities and ill health. Of the remaining 27 participants, 18 in the intervention arm attended an average of 5 sessions with 61% attending ≥6 sessions. Although not statistically powered, the study revealed a significant reduction in general anxiety, improved mindfulness and a trend towards improvement in SAQ scores in the intervention arm. CONCLUSION: One-third of patients with persistent non-cardiac chest pain were willing to participate in mindfulness-based therapy. An improvement in anxiety and mindfulness was detected in this feasibility study. A larger trial is required to demonstrate improvement in chest pain symptoms.

Current Perspectives on the Attainment of Lipid Modification Goals Relating to the Use of Statins and Ezetimibe for the Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in the United Kingdom.

Despite widespread evidence of the effectiveness of lipid modification for the reduction of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk, lipid modification goals are commonly underachieved in the United Kingdom (UK). In order to understand current UK lipid management guidance and the corresponding attainment of recommended lipid lowering goals relating to treatment with statins and ezetimibe, a literature review was conducted using PubMed focusing on publications between January 2017 and February 2020 in order to capture the most up-to-date literature. Identified publications were reviewed against key clinical guidelines for lipid management in relation to CVD risk from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE, CG181), the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN, 149) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS). Cholesterol lowering goals are central to current lipid lowering therapy guidance, although specific goals vary depending on the guideline and patients' individual risk profile. Current guidance by NICE and SIGN specifies that treatment should achieve a greater than 40% reduction in non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) at 3 months of treatment, while the ESC/EAS place emphasis on the lowering of low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C) and total cholesterol. Yet, despite widespread availability of guidance and consistent messaging that lipid lowering goals should be ambitious, current evidence suggests a significant proportion of UK patients have sub-optimal reductions in cholesterol/non-HDL-C/LDL-C. The reasons for this are reported to be multifactorial, including a lack of compliance with guidelines, particularly regarding high-intensity statin prescribing, patient adherence, statin intolerance and statin reluctance as well as wider genetic factors. A number of possible strategies to improve current lipid management and attainment of lipid-lowering goals were identified, including improving the patient-healthcare professional partnership, conducting audits of local prescribing versus guidance, implementing plans for the refinement of current services and considering alternative options such as cost-effective single pill combinations for improving adherence.

Managing hyperlipidaemia in patients with COVID-19 and during its pandemic: An expert panel position statement from HEART UK.

The emergence of the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) which causes Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has resulted in a pandemic. SARS-CoV-2 is highly contagious and its severity highly variable. The fatality rate is unpredictable but is amplified by several factors including advancing age, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, hypertension and obesity. A large proportion of patients with these conditions are treated with lipid lowering medication and questions regarding the safety of continuing lipid-lowering medication in patients infected with COVID-19 have arisen. Some have suggested they may exacerbate their condition. It is important to consider known interactions with lipid-lowering agents and with specific therapies for COVID-19. This statement aims to collate current evidence surrounding the safety of lipid-lowering medications in patients who have COVID-19. We offer a consensus view based on current knowledge and we rated the strength and level of evidence for these recommendations. Pubmed, Google scholar and Web of Science were searched extensively for articles using search terms: SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19, coronavirus, Lipids, Statin, Fibrates, Ezetimibe, PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies, nicotinic acid, bile acid sequestrants, nutraceuticals, red yeast rice, Omega-3-Fatty acids, Lomitapide, hypercholesterolaemia, dyslipidaemia and Volanesorsen. There is no evidence currently that lipid lowering therapy is unsafe in patients with COVID-19 infection. Lipid-lowering therapy should not be interrupted because of the pandemic or in patients at increased risk of COVID-19 infection. In patients with confirmed COVID-19, care should be taken to avoid drug interactions, between lipid-lowering medications and drugs that may be used to treat COVID-19, especially in patients with abnormalities in liver function tests.

Impact of lipoprotein apheresis on thrombotic parameters in patients with refractory angina and raised lipoprotein(a): Findings from a randomized controlled cross-over trial.

BACKGROUND: Raised lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is a cardiovascular risk factor common in patients with refractory angina. The apolipoprotein(a) component of Lp(a) exhibits structural homology with plasminogen and can enhance thrombosis and impair fibrinolysis. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to assess the effect of lipoprotein apheresis on markers of thrombosis and fibrinolysis in patients with high Lp(a). METHODS: In a prospective, single-blind, crossover trial, 20 patients with refractory angina and raised Lp(a) > 50 mg/dL were randomized to three months of weekly lipoprotein apheresis or sham. Blood taken before and after apheresis/sham was assessed using the Global Thrombosis Test, to assess time taken for in vitro thrombus formation (occlusion time) and endogenous fibrinolysis (lysis time), as well as von Willebrand Factor, fibrinogen, D-dimer, thrombin/anti-thrombin III complex, prothrombin fragments 1 + 2, and thrombin generation assays. RESULTS: Lp(a) was significantly reduced by apheresis (100.2 [interquartile range {IQR}, 69.6143.0] vs 24.8 [17.2,34.0] mg/dL, P = .0001) but not by sham (P = .0001 between treatment arms). Apheresis prolonged occlusion time (576 ± 116 s vs 723 ± 142 s, P < .0001) reflecting reduced platelet reactivity and reduced lysis time (1340 [1128, 1682] s vs 847 [685,1302] s, P = .0006) reflecting enhanced fibrinolysis, without corresponding changes with sham. Apheresis, but not sham, reduced von Willebrand Factor (149 [89.0, 164] vs 64.2 [48.5, 89.8] IU/dL, P = .0001), and fibrinogen (3.12 ± 0.68 vs 2.20 ± 0.53 g/L, P < .0001), and increased prothrombin fragments 1 + 2 (158.16 [128.77, 232.09] vs 795.12 [272.55, 1201.00] pmol/L, P = .0006). There was no change in D-dimer, thrombin/anti-thrombin III complex, or thrombin generation assay with apheresis or sham. CONCLUSION: Lipoprotein apheresis reduces Lp(a) and improves some thrombotic and fibrinolytic parameters in patients with refractory angina.

Lipoprotein apheresis efficacy, challenges and outcomes: A descriptive analysis from the UK Lipoprotein Apheresis Registry, 1989-2017.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In 2008, the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence in the UK recommended that patients undergoing lipoprotein apheresis (LA) should be included in an anonymised registry. The UK Lipoprotein Apheresis Registry was subsequently established in 2011. METHODS: Between 2011 and 2017, data was entered retrospectively and prospectively by seven LA centres in the UK for 151 patients. Twenty-two patients were involved in a research study and were therefore excluded from the analysis. Observational data was analysed for the remaining 129 patients. RESULTS: Most patients had heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia (HeFH) (45.0%); 23.3% had homozygous FH (HoFH); 7.8% had hyper-lipoproteinaemia (a) (Lp(a)) and 24.0% had other forms of dyslipidaemia. Detailed treatment data is available for 63 patients relating to 348 years of LA treatment. The number of years of treatment per patient ranged from 1 to 15. The mean reduction in interval mean LDL-C from the pre-procedure baseline was 43.14%. The mean reduction in interval mean Lp(a) from baseline was 37.95%. The registry data also shows a 62.5% reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) between the 2 years prior to, and the first 2 years following introduction of LA. CONCLUSIONS: The data generated by the UK Lipoprotein Apheresis Registry demonstrates that LA is a very efficient method of reducing LDL-C and Lp(a) and lowers the incidence rate of MACE. LA is an important tool in the management of selected patients with HoFH and drug-resistant dyslipidaemias.

Reflection on the development of the nurse consultant role.

The role of nurse consultant was introduced in the late 1990s to strengthen leadership in nursing, improve patient outcomes and enhance the quality of healthcare services. Nurse consultants have a wide-ranging remit that includes expert practice, professional leadership and consultancy, education, and service development. In this article, the author reflects on her experience of being one of the first nurse consultants, which included setting up nurse-led clinics, maintaining professional relationships with medical colleagues and assuming increasing responsibility for services. The article also examines the changes that the nurse consultant role has undergone since its inception in the 1990s.

Vascular access in lipoprotein apheresis: a retrospective analysis from the UK's largest lipoprotein apheresis centre.

INTRODUCTION: Lipoprotein apheresis (LA) has proven to be an effective, safe and life-saving therapy. Vascular access is needed to facilitate this treatment but has recognised complications. Despite consistency in treatment indication and duration there are no guidelines in place. The aim of this study is to characterise vascular access practice at the UK's largest LA centre and forward suggestions for future approaches. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of vascular access strategies was undertaken in all patients who received LA treatment in the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) Apheresis Unit at Harefield Hospital (Middlesex, UK) from November 2000 to March 2016. RESULTS: Fifty-three former and current patients underwent 4260 LA treatments. Peripheral vein cannulation represented 79% of initial vascular access strategies with arteriovenous (AV) fistula use accounting for 15%. Last used method of vascular access was peripheral vein cannulation in 57% versus AV fistula in 32%. Total AV fistula failure rate was 37%. CONCLUSIONS: Peripheral vein cannulation remains the most common method to facilitate LA. Practice trends indicate a move towards AV fistula creation; the favoured approach receiving support from the expert body in this area. AV fistula failure rate is high and of great concern, therefore we suggest the implementation of upper limb ultrasound vascular mapping in all patients who meet treatment eligibility criteria. We encourage close ties between apheresis units and specialist surgical centres to facilitate patient counselling and monitoring. Further prospective data regarding fistula failure is needed in this expanding treatment field.

Measuring cholesterol levels.

The measurement and management of cholesterol levels are essential to reduce the risk of developing heart disease. Nursing staff play a key role in the detection and treatment of high cholesterol levels and the promotion of good nutritional health. This article focuses on the process of and rationale for cholesterol testing.

Prevalence of obstructive coronary artery disease and prognosis in patients with stable symptoms and a zero-coronary calcium score.

AIMS: CT calcium scoring (CTCS) and CT cardiac angiography (CTCA) are widely used in patients with stable chest pain to exclude significant coronary artery disease (CAD). We aimed to resolve uncertainty about the prevalence of obstructive coronary artery disease and long-term outcomes in patients with a zero-calcium score (ZCS). METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients with stable cardiac symptoms referred for CTCS or CTCS and CTCA from chest pain clinics to a tertiary cardiothoracic centre were prospectively enrolled. In those with a ZCS, the prevalence of obstructive CAD on CTCA was determined. A follow-up for all-cause mortality was obtained from the NHS tracer service. A total of 3914 patients underwent CTCS of whom 2730 (69.7%) also had a CTCA. Half of the patients were men (50.3%) with a mean age of 56.9 years. Among patients who had both procedures, a ZCS was present in 52.2%, with a negative predictive value of 99.5% for excluding ≥70% stenosis on CTCA. During a mean follow-up of 5.2 years, the annual event rate was 0.3% for those with ZCS compared with 1.2% for CS ≥1. The presence of non-calcified atheroma on CTCA in patients with ZCS did not affect the prognostic value (P = 0.98). CONCLUSION: In patients with stable symptoms and a ZCS, obstructive CAD is rare, and prognosis over the long-term is excellent, regardless of whether non-calcified atheroma is identified. A ZCS could reliably be used as a 'gatekeeper' in this patient cohort, obviating the need for further more expensive tests.

HEART UK statement on the management of homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia in the United Kingdom.

This consensus statement addresses the current three main modalities of treatment of homozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia (HoFH): pharmacotherapy, lipoprotein (Lp) apheresis and liver transplantation. HoFH may cause very premature atheromatous arterial disease and death, despite treatment with Lp apheresis combined with statin, ezetimibe and bile acid sequestrants. Two new classes of drug, effective in lowering cholesterol in HoFH, are now licensed in the United Kingdom. Lomitapide is restricted to use in HoFH but, may cause fatty liver and is very expensive. PCSK9 inhibitors are quite effective in receptor defective HoFH, are safe and are less expensive. Lower treatment targets for lipid lowering in HoFH, in line with those for the general FH population, have been proposed to improve cardiovascular outcomes. HEART UK presents a strategy combining Lp apheresis with pharmacological treatment to achieve these targets in the United Kingdom (UK). Improved provision of Lp apheresis by use of existing infrastructure for extracorporeal treatments such as renal dialysis is promoted. The clinical management of adults and children with HoFH including advice on pregnancy and contraception are addressed. A premise of the HEART UK strategy is that the risk of early use of drug treatments beyond their licensed age restriction may be balanced against risks of liver transplantation or ineffective treatment in severely affected patients. This may be of interest beyond the UK.

Familial hypercholesterolaemia: clinical features and management.

Coronary heart disease is the leading cause of mortality and morbidity in the UK, for which hypercholesterolaemia is a risk factor. This article concentrates on the management of patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH). It discusses FH, how it is diagnosed, and the treatments that are available.

The impact of lipoprotein apheresis in patients with refractory angina and raised lipoprotein(a): Objectives and methods of a randomised controlled trial.

It is well established that Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is an independent cardiovascular risk factor and predictor of major adverse cardiovascular events. Lipoprotein apheresis is currently the most effective approved treatment available, with minimal effect conferred by conventional lipid lowering agents. A growing body of evidence suggests that aggressively lowering raised Lp(a) may improve cardiovascular and clinical outcomes, although more prospective research is required in this field. Angina which is refractory to conventional medical therapy and revascularisation is extremely challenging to manage. There is a significant unmet need to establish therapeutic options. Our goal is to determine the impact of lipoprotein apheresis on clinical parameters and symptoms of patients with refractory angina secondary to advanced coronary disease and raised Lp(a). Determining whether we should aggressively lower Lp(a) in such patients remains a very important question, which could potentially impact on the management of a large population. We will also gain insight into how this treatment works and the mechanisms via which Lp(a) increases cardiovascular risk. We are currently conducting a prospective, randomised controlled crossover study of patients with refractory angina and raised Lp(a), randomised to undergoing three months of weekly lipoprotein apheresis or sham apheresis. Patients will then crossover to the opposite study arm after a 1 month wash-out phase. We will assess myocardial perfusion, carotid atherosclerosis, endothelial vascular function, thrombogenesis, oxidised LDL and their antibodies, exercise capacity, angina and quality of life at the beginning and end of treatment, to determine the net true treatment effect on the above parameters. This is a novel area of research, as previous studies have not assessed the role of lipoprotein apheresis in patients with refractory angina and raised Lp(a) in a prospective randomised controlled manner.

High prevalence of raised lipoprotein(a) in patients with refractory angina.

BACKGROUND: Angina that is refractory to conventional medical therapy and revascularisation, remains challenging to manage and poses significant burden to patients. Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] has emerged as an important independent cardiovascular risk factor and predictor of adverse outcomes in atherosclerotic disease. The prevalence of raised Lp(a) amongst patients with refractory angina has not yet been defined. OBJECTIVE: To establish the prevalence of raised [Lp(a)] >500 mg/L in patients with refractory angina. METHODS: We conducted an epidemiological screening pilot study in 75 patients with refractory angina from a UK tertiary cardiac centre. We determined the proportion of the cohort with raised Lp(a) >500 mg/L using an isoform-insensitive method. In addition, a full fasting lipid profile (including: LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, total cholesterol to HDL ratio and triglycerides) was obtained. Patients were also asked about the presence of conventional cardiovascular risk factors. RESULTS: Our study demonstrated that 60% of the 75 patients with refractory angina had raised Lp(a) levels of >500 mg/L. The median and inter-quartile range of Lp(a) values were 771 mg/L (162 mg/L,1260 mg/L) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This high prevalence of raised Lp(a) detected in our cohort with refractory angina may suggest a causal role. Further research is necessary to confirm this association and prospective studies are needed to explore the potential therapeutic benefit of Lp(a) reduction in patients with refractory angina.

The expanding role of lipoprotein apheresis in the treatment of raised lipoprotein(a) in ischaemic heart disease and refractory angina.

It is increasingly recognised that lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], an inherited, genetically-determined form of LDL-cholesterol, is an independent cardiovascular risk factor and predictor of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. Lp(a) is felt to increase cardiovascular risk via its pro-thrombotic effect and by enhancing intimal lipoprotein deposition. Lipoprotein apheresis is currently the most effective treatment for raised Lp(a). There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that aggressively lowering raised Lp(a) may improve cardiovascular and clinical outcomes, although much more research is required in this field. Angina which is refractory to conventional medical therapy and revascularisation, is extremely challenging to manage. Treatment options for such patients remain very limited. We describe the case of a patient with refractory angina and raised lipoprotein(a) in whom aggressive reduction of Lp(a) with lipoprotein apheresis successfully ameliorated the progression of coronary stenosis and provided effective and durable relief of angina symptoms. In our centre, we are currently conducting a prospective, randomised controlled cross-over study of patients with refractory angina and raised Lp(a), randomised to undergoing lipoprotein apheresis or 'sham' apheresis with assessment of myocardial perfusion, carotid atherosclerosis, endothelial vascular function, thrombogenesis, oxidised phospholipids and their antibodies, exercise capacity, angina symptoms and quality of life at the beginning and end of treatment.

Low-density lipoprotein apheresis is effective in reducing lipoprotein(a) levels and in improving symptoms in a patient with refractory angina secondary to accelerated coronary artery disease.

Coronary artery disease remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in the Western world. High plasma Lp(a) concentrations are related to the risk of cardiovascular disease, but Lp(a) is rarely assayed and treated. We present the case of a 50-year-old gentleman with refractory angina, whose coronary disease continued to progress despite optimal medical and surgical therapy. We show that the aggressive reduction of Lp(a) successfully ameliorated the progression of coronary stenosis and provides effective and durable relief of symptoms.