White Coat Uncontrolled Hypertension in Teleconsultation: A New and Frequent Entity.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular risk seems not to be greater in patients with white coat uncontrolled hypertension (WUCH) than in patients with sustained blood pressure (BP) control. Therefore, its detection is important to avoid overtreatment. The COVID-19 pandemic determined a massive migration of hypertension consultations from the face-to-face modality to teleconsultations, and it is unknown whether WUCH exists in this context. AIM: We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of WUCH through home BP monitoring (HBPM) in treated hypertensive patients evaluated by teleconsultation. METHODS: We included treated hypertensive patients that owned a digital BP monitor. During teleconsultation, patients were asked to perform two BP measurements and then a 7-day HBPM, using the same device. Patients were classified as having WUCH if BP was ≥ 140 and/or 90 mmHg in teleconsultation and < 135/85 mmHg on HBPM. The prevalence of WUCH and its 95% confidence interval were estimated. One-way ANOVA, the Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test were used to compare the characteristics of these patients with the other groups. RESULTS: We included 341 patients (45.2% male, mean age 62.3 years). The prevalence of WUCH was 33.1% (95% CI 28.3-38.3%). Significant differences were found in terms of age, the number of antihypertensive drugs and the use of calcium channel blockers, all lower in the WUCH group as compared with the groups with elevated BP on HBPM. CONCLUSION: WUCH exists in teleconsultation and is very frequent. It can be easily detected though HBPM, thus avoiding overmedication, and its potential impact on side-effects and health costs.

Impact of the 2019 European Guidelines on Diabetes in Clinical Practice: Real and Simulated Analyses of Lipid Goals.

BACKGROUND: Recent European guidelines on diabetes, prediabetes, and cardiovascular disease developed for the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) in collaboration with the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) significantly changed some concepts on risk stratification, lipid goals, and recommendations for the use of lipid-lowering drugs. The objectives of this work were to describe the lipid-lowering treatment prescribed for patients with diabetes and to determine the percentage of patients that achieved the lipid goals recommended by the 2019 ESC/EASD Guidelines on Diabetes in real and simulated scenarios. METHODS: A multicenter, cross-sectional study was performed. Subjects >18 years with type 2 diabetes were included. The recommendations of the 2019 ESC/EASD Guidelines were followed. The real and simulated (ideal setting using adequate doses of statins ± ezetimibe) scenarios were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 528 patients were included. In total, 62.5% of patients received statins (17.1% high intensity). Most patients were stratified as "very high risk" (54.2%) or "high risk" (43.4%). Only 13.3% achieved the double lipid goal (LDL-C and non-HDL-C goals according to the risk categories). In the simulation analysis, the proportion of subjects that did not reach the therapeutic objective decreased in all risk strata, although a considerable proportion of subjects persisted outside the target. CONCLUSION: The difficulty of achieving lipid goals in diabetic patients was considerable when applying the new guidelines. The situation would improve if we optimized treatment, but the prescription of new lipid-lowering drugs could be limited by their high cost.

Metas lipídicas en pacientes diabéticos. Implicaciones clínicas luego de aplicar una nueva fórmula para el cálculo del colesterol-LDL / Lipid Goals in Diabetic Patients. Clinical Implications after Application of a New Formula for LDL-cholesterol Calculation

RESUMEN Introducción: Existen claras recomendaciones para el manejo lipídico en los diabéticos. Una nueva fórmula para el cálculo del C-LDL mejoraría la imprecisión de la fórmula de Friedewald. Objetivos: Analizar el uso de estatinas y el cumplimiento de las metas lipídicas en pacientes diabéticos, evaluando las consecuencias de aplicar una nueva fórmula para el cálculo del C-LDL. Métodos: Estudio descriptivo, transversal y multicéntrico. Se incluyeron diabéticos tipo 2 mayores de 18 años. El C-LDL se calculó con la fórmula clásica (Friedewald) y la nueva fórmula. Se siguieron las recomendaciones del documento de posición para el uso adecuado de estatinas (Sociedad Argentina de Cardiología). Resultados: Se incluyeron 528 pacientes. En prevención secundaria, el 77,2% recibió estatinas (23,4% alta intensidad). El 36,6% y el 36,0% alcanzaron la meta de C-LDL menor a 70 mg/dL y de C-noHDL inferior a 100 mg/dL, respectivamente. El 20,8% de los pacientes con un C-LDL menor de 70 mg/dL (Friedewald) salió de meta al aplicar la nueva fórmula. En los pacientes en prevención primaria con factores de riesgo o daño de órgano blanco, el 62,2% recibió estatinas (14,7% alta intensidad). El 20,9% y el 20,4% alcanzaron la meta de C-LDL menor a 70 mg/dL y de C-noHDL inferior a 100 mg/dL. El 27,7% de los pacientes con un C-LDL menor de 70 mg/dL (Friedewald) salió de meta al aplicar la nueva fórmula. A mayor nivel de triglicéridos, más pacientes salieron de meta de C-LDL con la nueva fórmula. Conclusión: El cumplimiento de las metas lipídicas y el uso adecuado de estatinas en esta población fue deficiente. Aplicar la nueva fórmula de C-LDL optimizó la evaluación de estos pacientes.

ABSTRACT Background: There are clear recommendations for lipid management in diabetic patients. A new formula for the calculation of LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) would improve the inaccuracy of the Friedewald formula. Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyze the use of statins and the fulfillment of lipid goals in diabetic patients, evaluating the consequences of applying a new formula for LDL-C calculation. Methods: This was a descriptive, cross-sectional, multicenter study including type 2 diabetic patients over 18 years of age. LDL-C was calculated using the classic Friedewald formula and the new formula. Recommendations of the position document for the appropriate use of statins from the Argentine Society of Cardiology were followed. Results: A total of 528 patients were included in the study. In secondary prevention, 77.2% of patients received statins (23.4% high-intensity statins) and 36.6% and 36.0% of these patients achieved the goals of LDL-C below 70% mg/dl and non-HDL-C below 100 mg/dl, respectively. In 20.8% of patients with LDL-C below 70 mg/dl according to the Friedewald formula, this goal was not attained when the new formula was applied. In primary prevention, 62.2% patients with risk factors or white organ damage received statins (14.7% high-intensity statins) and 20.9% and 20.4% achieved the goals of LDL-C below 70% mg/dl and non-HDL-C below 100 mg/dl. In 27.7% of patients with LDL-C below 70 mg/dl using the Friedewald formula, this goal was not reached when applying the new formula. More patients did not achieve the LDL-C goal with the new formula when the triglyceride level was higher. Conclusion: In this population, the appropriate use of statins and the fulfillment of lipid goals were poor. Applying the new LDL-C formula optimized the evaluation of these patients.