Prevención cardiovascular en la diabetes mellitus. ¿Es adecuado hablar de riesgo moderado o intermedio? / Cardiovascular prevention in diabetes mellitus. Is it appropriate to speak of moderate or intermediate risk?

La diabetes, especialmente la tipo 2, está considerada como una situación de riesgo de enfermedad cardiovascular aterosclerosa (ECVA). Los sujetos con diabetes tipo 2 tienen una mortalidad por ECVA 3 veces superior a la de la población general, atribuida a la hiperglucemia y a la frecuente asociación de otros factores de riesgo cardiovascular, como la dislipidemia aterogénica. Numerosas sociedades científicas han establecido una clasificación de riesgo de ECVA en la diabetes basada en 3 grados (moderado, alto y muy alto). Los objetivos del control de la dislipidemia están claramente definidos y aceptados, y varían dependiendo del riesgo cardiovascular previamente establecido. En el riesgo moderado o intermedio, las guías proponen una intervención menos intensiva, manteniendo cifras de c-LDL<100mg/dL y de c-no-HDL<130mg/dL, y esperar 10 años hasta alcanzar la categoría de alto riesgo para iniciar un tratamiento más intensivo. Sin embargo, durante la década de seguimiento preconizada en las guías, el depósito de colesterol en la pared arterial va aumentando, facilitando el desarrollo de una placa de ateroma inestable e inflamatoria, y el desarrollo de ECVA. Alternativamente, se podría considerar desde el inicio que la diabetes conlleva una situación de alto riesgo y el objetivo debería ser c-LDL<70mg/dL. Además, mantener cifras de c-LDL<70mg/dL contribuye a reducir y estabilizar la placa de ateroma, evitando o disminuyendo episodios de mortalidad por ECVA durante esos años de evolución de la diabetes. ¿Deberíamos mantener los objetivos propuestos en los sujetos con diabetes y riesgo moderado durante una década hasta alcanzar la fase de alto riesgo cardiovascular o, por el contrario, adoptar desde el inicio una postura más intensiva buscando reducir el riesgo cardiovascular en la mayoría de los pacientes con diabetes? ¿Es mejor esperar o prevenir con medidas terapéuticas efectivas desde el primer momento? (AU)

Diabetes, especially type 2, is considered a risk situation for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Subjects with diabetes type 2 have a mortality rate due to ASCVD 3 times higher than that found in the general population, attributed to hyperglycemia and the frequent association of other cardiovascular risk factors, such as atherogenic dyslipidemia. Numerous scientific societies have established a risk classification for ASCVD in diabetes based on 3 degrees (moderate, high and very high). The objectives of dyslipidemia control are clearly defined and accepted, and vary depending on the previously established cardiovascular risk. In moderate or intermediate risk, the guidelines propose a less intensive intervention, maintaining LDL-C levels<100mg/dL and NO-HDL-C levels<130mg/dL, and waiting 10 years until reaching the high-risk category to initiate more intensive treatment. However, during the decade of follow-up recommended in the guidelines, cholesterol deposition in the arterial wall increases, facilitating the development of an unstable and inflammatory atheromatous plaque, and the development of ASCVD. Alternatively, diabetes could be considered from the outset to be a high-risk situation and the goal should be LDL-C<70mg/dL. Furthermore, maintaining LDL-C levels<70mg/dL contributes to reducing and stabilizing atheromatous plaque, avoiding or reducing mortality episodes due to ASCVD during those years of diabetes evolution. Should we maintain the proposed objectives in subjects with diabetes and moderate risk for a decade until reaching the high cardiovascular risk phase or, on the contrary, should we adopt a more intensive stance from the beginning seeking to reduce cardiovascular risk in the majority of patients with diabetes? Is it better to wait or prevent with effective therapeutic measures from the first moment? (AU)

Cardiovascular prevention in diabetes mellitus. Is it appropriate to speak of moderate or intermediate risk? / Prevención cardiovascular en la diabetes mellitus. ¿Es adecuado hablar de riesgo moderado o intermedio?

Diabetes, especially type 2, is considered a risk situation for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Subjects with diabetes type 2 have a mortality rate due to ASCVD 3 times higher than that found in the general population, attributed to hyperglycemia and the frequent association of other cardiovascular risk factors, such as atherogenic dyslipidemia. Numerous scientific societies have established a risk classification for ASCVD in diabetes based on 3 degrees (moderate, high and very high). The objectives of dyslipidemia control are clearly defined and accepted, and vary depending on the previously established cardiovascular risk. In moderate or intermediate risk, the guidelines propose a less intensive intervention, maintaining LDL-C levels<100mg/dL and NO-HDL-C levels<130mg/dL, and waiting 10 years until reaching the high-risk category to initiate more intensive treatment. However, during the decade of follow-up recommended in the guidelines, cholesterol deposition in the arterial wall increases, facilitating the development of an unstable and inflammatory atheromatous plaque, and the development of ASCVD. Alternatively, diabetes could be considered from the outset to be a high-risk situation and the goal should be LDL-C<70mg/dL. Furthermore, maintaining LDL-C levels<70mg/dL contributes to reducing and stabilizing atheromatous plaque, avoiding or reducing mortality episodes due to ASCVD during those years of diabetes evolution. Should we maintain the proposed objectives in subjects with diabetes and moderate risk for a decade until reaching the high cardiovascular risk phase or, on the contrary, should we adopt a more intensive stance from the beginning seeking to reduce cardiovascular risk in the majority of patients with diabetes? Is it better to wait or prevent with effective therapeutic measures from the first moment?