Rheumatoid Arthritis, Statin Indication and Lipid Goals: Analysis According to Different Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Different strategies have been proposed for the cardiovascular risk management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). OBJECTIVES: (1) To estimate the cardiovascular risk by different strategies in RA patients, analyzing which proportion of patients would be candidates to receive statin therapy; (2) to identify how many patients meet the recommended lipid goals. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed from a secondary database. The QRISK-3 score, the Framingham score (adjusted for a multiplying factor×1.5), the ASCVD calculator and the SCORE calculator were estimated. The indications for statin therapy according to NICE, Argentine Consensus, ACC/AHA, and new European guidelines were analyzed. The recommended LDL-C goals were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 420 patients were included. In total, 24.7% and 48.7% of patients in primary and secondary prevention were receiving statins, respectively. Only 19.4% of patients with cardiovascular history received high intensity statins. Applying the ACC/AHA guidelines (based on ASCVD score), the Argentine Consensuses (based on adjusted Framingham score), the NICE guidelines (based on QRISK-3) and European recommendations (based on SCORE), 26.9%, 26.5%, 41.1% and 18.2% of the population were eligible for statin therapy, respectively. Following the new European recommendations, 50.0%, 46.2% and 15.9% of the patients with low-moderate, high or very high risk achieved the suggested lipid goals. CONCLUSION: Applying four strategies for lipid management in our population, the cardiovascular risk stratification and the indication for statins were different. A significant gap was observed when comparing the expected and observed statin indication, with few patients achieving the LDL-C goals.

Rheumatoid Arthritis, Statin Indication and Lipid Goals: Analysis According to Different Recommendations / Artritis reumatoide, indicación de estatinas y objetivos lipídicos: Análisis según diferentes recomendaciones

Background: Different strategies have been proposed for the cardiovascular risk management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).Objectives(1) To estimate the cardiovascular risk by different strategies in RA patients, analyzing which proportion of patients would be candidates to receive statin therapy; (2) to identify how many patients meet the recommended lipid goals. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed from a secondary database. The QRISK-3 score, the Framingham score (adjusted for a multiplying factor×1.5), the ASCVD calculator and the SCORE calculator were estimated. The indications for statin therapy according to NICE, Argentine Consensus, ACC/AHA, and new European guidelines were analyzed. The recommended LDL-C goals were analyzed. Results: A total of 420 patients were included. In total, 24.7% and 48.7% of patients in primary and secondary prevention were receiving statins, respectively. Only 19.4% of patients with cardiovascular history received high intensity statins. Applying the ACC/AHA guidelines (based on ASCVD score), the Argentine Consensuses (based on adjusted Framingham score), the NICE guidelines (based on QRISK-3) and European recommendations (based on SCORE), 26.9%, 26.5%, 41.1% and 18.2% of the population were eligible for statin therapy, respectively. Following the new European recommendations, 50.0%, 46.2% and 15.9% of the patients with low-moderate, high or very high risk achieved the suggested lipid goals. Conclusion: Applying four strategies for lipid management in our population, the cardiovascular risk stratification and the indication for statins were different. A significant gap was observed when comparing the expected and observed statin indication, with few patients achieving the LDL-C goals.(AU)

Antecedentes: Se han propuesto diferentes estrategias para el manejo del riesgo cardiovascular en pacientes con artritis reumatoide (AR).Objetivos(1) estimar el riesgo cardiovascular mediante diferentes estrategias en pacientes con AR, analizando qué proporción de pacientes deberían recibir estatinas; (2) identificar cuántos pacientes alcanzaron los objetivos lipídicos recomendados. Métodos: Estudio de corte transversal. Se estimaron los puntajes QRISK-3, Framingham (ajustado por un factor multiplicador × 1,5), ASCVD y SCORE. Se analizaron las indicaciones de estatinas, según las guías NICE, el Consenso Argentino, las guías ACC/AHA 2018 y las nuevas directrices europeas. Se analizaron los objetivos de C-LDL. Resultados: Se incluyeron 420 pacientes; 24,7 y 48,7% de los pacientes en prevención primaria y secundaria recibían estatinas, respectivamente. El 19,4% de los pacientes con antecedentes cardiovasculares recibían estatinas de alta intensidad. Aplicando las guías ACC/AHA (basadas en el puntaje ASCVD), el Consenso Argentino (basado en el puntaje ajustado de Framingham), las pautas NICE (basadas en el QRISK-3) y las recomendaciones europeas (basadas en el SCORE), 26,9, 26,5, 41,1 y el 18,2% de la población eran elegibles para el tratamiento con estatinas, respectivamente. Siguiendo las nuevas recomendaciones europeas, 50, 46,2 y 15,9% de los pacientes con riesgo bajo-moderado, alto o muy alto lograron los objetivos lipídicos recomendados. Conclusión: Aplicando varias estrategias para el manejo de los lípidos en nuestra población, la estratificación del riesgo cardiovascular y la indicación de estatinas fueron diferentes. Se observó una brecha significativa entre la indicación de estatinas esperada y observada, logrando los objetivos de C-LDL muy pocos pacientes.(AU)

Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio predict in-hospital mortality in symptomatic but unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm patients.

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic but unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a potentially fatal disease since its etiopathogenesis, involving acute changes in the aortic wall, including inflammation, increasing the probability of impending rupture. The objective of the present study was to assess the prognostic value of the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) in patients undergoing urgent symptomatic AAA repair. METHODS: This was a retrospective study including 29 patients with symptomatic AAA repaired between 2011 and 2020. Both NLR and PLR were calculated on hospital admission prior to the intervention. The primary end point was in-hospital mortality, and the secondary end point included length of hospital stay and postoperative complications. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality rate was 10.3%. The discriminatory performance to predict the primary end point was very good both for PLR (area under the ROC curve [AUC]: 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82-1.00; P=0.02) and NLR (AUC: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.75-1.00]; P=0.04). The best cutoff point to predict in-hospital mortality was 185 for PLR (100% sensitivity and 85% specificity) and 6.4 for NLR (100% sensitivity and 77% specificity). The most frequent postoperative complication was acute kidney failure (37.9%). Both elevated PLR as NLR were significantly associated with acute kidney failure and multiorgan failure in the immediate postoperative period (P<0.01). None of the two ratios was associated with length of hospital stay (P=NS). CONCLUSIONS: Both PLR and NLR are low-cost inflammatory markers widely available in every emergency department, with excellent performance to predict in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing symptomatic AAA repair. Patients with a PLR≥185 and/or an NLR≥6.4 could benefit from a "surveyed waiting conduct" improving the preoperative clinical condition prior to the intervention, or even considering endovascular repair.

Five-year outcomes of elective infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair at a university hospital in Argentina / Resultados a cinco años de la reparación electiva del aneurisma de aorta abdominal infrarrenal en un hospital universitario de Argentina.

Objective: Few data about outcomes of elective infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in Latin America have been published. The objective of the present study is to address this aspect in our population. Method: Retrospective cohort, in which patients with infrarenal AAA undergoing elective surgical or endovascular repair from January 2011 to May 2017 at a university hospital in Autonomous City of Buenos Aires were consecutively included. The primary endpoints were perioperative mortality and all-cause mortality during follow-up. Among the secondary endpoints, the requeriment of reinterventions was assessed. Results: 195 patients were included. Open surgery was performed in 72 patients (36.9%) and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in 123 (63.1%). Perioperative mortality in the surgery group was 2.8%, while no deaths were recorded in the endovascular group (p = 0.06). The median follow-up was 38 months. No statistically significant difference was found in long-term mortality incidence rate between patients who underwent EVAR and those who underwent open surgery (7% per year vs. 6.7% per year, p = 0.8). The requirement of reinterventions was significantly higher in the endovascular group (9.0% vs. 0%, p = 0.01). Conclusions: Survival analyses demonstrated no statistically significant differences in perioperative and long-term mortality for patients who underwent EVAR compared with those who underwent open surgery, while the former had a higher rate of reinterventions. The results observed in our population do not differ from those published in the United State or Europe.

Ojetivo: La evidencia surgida en Latinoamérica acerca de los resultados de la reparación electiva del aneurisma de aorta abdominal (AAA) es escasa, por lo que el objetivo de este estudio es abordar este aspecto en la población nacional. Método: Cohorte retrospectiva en la cual se incluyó de forma consecutiva a pacientes con AAA infrarrenal sometidos a reparación quirúrgica o endovascular en forma electiva desde enero de 2011 hasta mayo de 2017 en un hospital universitario de la Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires. Los puntos finales primarios fueron la mortalidad perioperatoria y la mortalidad por todas las causas durante el seguimiento. Entre los puntos finales secundarios se evaluó el requerimiento de reintervenciones. Resultados: Se incluyó a 195 pacientes. La operación abierta se llevó a cabo en 72 pacientes (36.9%), mientras que el procedimiento endovascular se practicó en 123 (63.1%). La mortalidad perioperatoria en el grupo quirúrgico fue de 2.8%, sin registro de muertes en el grupo endovascular (p = 0.06). La mediana de seguimiento fue de 38 meses. La incidencia de mortalidad tardía fue de 7%/año en pacientes con reparación endovascular y de 6.7%/año en los quirúrgicos (p = 0.8). El requerimiento de reintervenciones fue significativamente mayor en el grupo endovascular (9.0% vs. 0%, p = 0.01). Conclusiones: La mortalidad perioperatoria y la mortalidad tardía de los pacientes tratados de manera electiva por AAA en forma quirúrgica o endovascular fueron similares, en tanto que los pacientes sometidos a reparación endovascular requirieron mayor cantidad de reintervenciones. Los resultados observados en la población no difieren de los publicados en Estados Unidos o Europa.

Rheumatoid Arthritis, Statin Indication and Lipid Goals: Analysis According to Different Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Different strategies have been proposed for the cardiovascular risk management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). OBJECTIVES: (1) To estimate the cardiovascular risk by different strategies in RA patients, analyzing which proportion of patients would be candidates to receive statin therapy; (2) to identify how many patients meet the recommended lipid goals. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was performed from a secondary database. The QRISK-3 score, the Framingham score (adjusted for a multiplying factor×1.5), the ASCVD calculator and the SCORE calculator were estimated. The indications for statin therapy according to NICE, Argentine Consensus, ACC/AHA, and new European guidelines were analyzed. The recommended LDL-C goals were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 420 patients were included. In total, 24.7% and 48.7% of patients in primary and secondary prevention were receiving statins, respectively. Only 19.4% of patients with cardiovascular history received high intensity statins. Applying the ACC/AHA guidelines (based on ASCVD score), the Argentine Consensuses (based on adjusted Framingham score), the NICE guidelines (based on QRISK-3) and European recommendations (based on SCORE), 26.9%, 26.5%, 41.1% and 18.2% of the population were eligible for statin therapy, respectively. Following the new European recommendations, 50.0%, 46.2% and 15.9% of the patients with low-moderate, high or very high risk achieved the suggested lipid goals. CONCLUSION: Applying four strategies for lipid management in our population, the cardiovascular risk stratification and the indication for statins were different. A significant gap was observed when comparing the expected and observed statin indication, with few patients achieving the LDL-C goals.

Acute pulmonary embolism in a patient with mild COVID-19 symptoms: a case report.

BACKGROUND: The venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent condition, which may worsen the prognosis of hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Nevertheless, the incidence of this complication is unknown in patients with mild COVID-19 symptoms. CASE SUMMARY: A 26-year-old female nurse, who had been taking oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) treatment for the last 2 years, developed mild COVID-19 symptoms (rhinitis and anosmia). She underwent isolation at home and was subsequently followed up with telehealth visits. Fifteen days after her initial presentation, she developed acute onset sudden dyspnoea. On physical examination, she was found to be tachycardic with normal pulse oximetry. The initial risk score for VTE was moderate and laboratory results showed increased D-dimer level without other relevant findings. Computed tomography pulmonary angiography was performed, which confirmed low-risk subsegmental pulmonary embolism. DISCUSSION: Venous thromboembolism in patients who present with severe COVID-19 symptoms has already been described in the literature; its incidence is greater in patients hospitalized in intensive care units. Efforts to prevent VTE based on risk scores are widely recognized. However, the relationship in patients who present with mild COVID-19 symptoms and VTE is still unknown. Recently, experts on this field have introduced thromboprophylaxis guidelines including ambulatory patients based on the severity of COVID-19 symptoms and pro-thrombotic risk. Our patient showed no major risk for developing VTE; therefore, the VTE could be associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection or the eventual pro-thrombotic association with the concomitant use of OCPs.