Search

Background: Carotid artery atherosclerosis is highly prevalent in the general population and is a well-established risk factor for acute ischemic stroke. Although the morphological characteristics of vulnerable plaques are well recognized, there is a lack of consensus in reporting and interpreting carotid plaque features. Objectives: The aim of this paper is to establish a consistent and comprehensive approach for imaging and reporting carotid plaque by introducing the Plaque–RADS (Reporting and Data System) score. Methods: A panel of experts recognized the necessity to develop a classification system for carotid plaque and its defining characteristics. Using a multimodality analysis approach, the Plaque-RADS categories were established through consensus, drawing on existing published reports. Results: The authors present a universal classification that is applicable to both researchers and clinicians. The Plaque-RADS score offers a morphological assessment in addition to the prevailing quantitative parameter of “stenosis.” The Plaque-RADS score spans from grade 1 (indicating complete absence of plaque) to grade 4 (representing complicated plaque). Accompanying visual examples are included to facilitate a clear understanding of the Plaque-RADS categories. Conclusions: Plaque-RADS is a standardized and reliable system of reporting carotid plaque composition and morphology via different imaging modalities, such as ultrasound, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. This scoring system has the potential to help in the precise identification of patients who may benefit from exclusive medical intervention and those who require alternative treatments, thereby enhancing patient care. A standardized lexicon and structured reporting promise to enhance communication between radiologists, referring clinicians, and scientists.

Ozge Telci Caklili,1 Mustafa Cesur,2 Dimitri P Mikhailidis,3 Manfredi Rizzo4 1Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Faculty of Medicine, University of Istanbul, Istanbul, Türkiye; 2Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Ankara Guven University Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye; 3Department of Clinical Biochemistry and Department of Surgical Biotechnology, Division of Surgery and Interventional Science, Medical School, University College London (UCL), London, UK; 4School of Medicine, Department of Health Promotion, Mother and Child Care, Internal Medicine and Medical Specialties (Promise), University of Palermo, Palermo, ItalyCorrespondence: Manfredi Rizzo, School of Medicine, Promise Department, University of Palermo, Via del Vespro 141, Palermo, 90127, Italy, Tel/Fax +39 091 655-2945, Email manfredi.rizzo@unipa.itAbstract: Obesity has become an epidemic and a worldwide problem and its treatment is ever-evolving. Apart from diet and exercise, medication and surgery are other options. After disappointing side effects of various obesity drugs, new treatments showed promising results. This review discusses the following anti-obesity drugs: liraglutide, semaglutide, tirzepatide, orlistat, as well as the phentermine/topiramate and bupropion/naltrexone combinations. These drugs have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for weight reduction except for tirzepatide which is still under evaluation. Efficacy and tolerable safety profiles of some of these drugs contribute to the management of obesity and reduce the complications associated with this chronic disease.Keywords: obesity, drugs, liraglutide, semaglutide, tirzepatide, orlistat, phentermine/topiramate, bupropion/naltrexone

Statin intolerance is a clinical syndrome whereby adverse effects (AEs) associated with statin therapy [most commonly statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS)] result in the discontinuation of therapy and consequently increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, complete statin intolerance occurs in only a small minority of treated patients (estimated prevalence of only 3–5%). Many perceived AEs are misattributed (e.g. physical musculoskeletal injury and inflammatory myopathies), and subjective symptoms occur as a result of the fact that patients expect them to do so when taking medicines (the nocebo/drucebo effect)—what might be truth even for over 50% of all patients with muscle weakness/pain. Clear guidance is necessary to enable the optimal management of plasma in real-world clinical practice in patients who experience subjective AEs. In this Position Paper of the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), we present a step-by-step patient-centred approach to the identification and management of SAMS with a particular focus on strategies to prevent and manage the nocebo/drucebo effect and to improve long-term compliance with lipid-lowering therapy.

AIMS: Statin intolerance (SI) represents a significant public health problem for which precise estimates of prevalence are needed. Statin intolerance remains an important clinical challenge, and it is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. This meta-analysis estimates the overall prevalence of SI, the prevalence according to different diagnostic criteria and in different disease settings, and identifies possible risk factors/conditions that might increase the risk of SI. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched several databases up to 31 May 2021, for studies that reported the prevalence of SI. The primary endpoint was overall prevalence and prevalence according to a range of diagnostic criteria [National Lipid Association (NLA), International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS)] and in different disease settings. The secondary endpoint was to identify possible risk factors for SI. A random-effects model was applied to estimate the overall pooled prevalence. A total of 176 studies [112 randomized controlled trials (RCTs); 64 cohort studies] with 4 143 517 patients were ultimately included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of SI was 9.1% (95% confidence interval 8.0-10%). The prevalence was similar when defined using NLA, ILEP, and EAS criteria [7.0% (6.0-8.0%), 6.7% (5.0-8.0%), 5.9% (4.0-7.0%), respectively]. The prevalence of SI in RCTs was significantly lower compared with cohort studies [4.9% (4.0-6.0%) vs. 17% (14-19%)]. The prevalence of SI in studies including both primary and secondary prevention patients was much higher than when primary or secondary prevention patients were analysed separately [18% (14-21%), 8.2% (6.0-10%), 9.1% (6.0-11%), respectively]. Statin lipid solubility did not affect the prevalence of SI [4.0% (2.0-5.0%) vs. 5.0% (4.0-6.0%)]. Age [odds ratio (OR) 1.33, P = 0.04], female gender (OR 1.47, P = 0.007), Asian and Black race (P < 0.05 for both), obesity (OR 1.30, P = 0.02), diabetes

AIMS: Statin intolerance (SI) represents a significant public health problem for which precise estimates of prevalence are needed. Statin intolerance remains an important clinical challenge, and it is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. This meta-analysis estimates the overall prevalence of SI, the prevalence according to different diagnostic criteria and in different disease settings, and identifies possible risk factors/conditions that might increase the risk of SI. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched several databases up to 31 May 2021, for studies that reported the prevalence of SI. The primary endpoint was overall prevalence and prevalence according to a range of diagnostic criteria [National Lipid Association (NLA), International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS)] and in different disease settings. The secondary endpoint was to identify possible risk factors for SI. A random-effects model was applied to estimate the overall pooled prevalence. A total of 176 studies [112 randomized controlled trials (RCTs); 64 cohort studies] with 4 143 517 patients were ultimately included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of SI was 9.1% (95% confidence interval 8.0-10%). The prevalence was similar when defined using NLA, ILEP, and EAS criteria [7.0% (6.0-8.0%), 6.7% (5.0-8.0%), 5.9% (4.0-7.0%), respectively]. The prevalence of SI in RCTs was significantly lower compared with cohort studies [4.9% (4.0-6.0%) vs. 17% (14-19%)]. The prevalence of SI in studies including both primary and secondary prevention patients was much higher than when primary or secondary prevention patients were analysed separately [18% (14-21%), 8.2% (6.0-10%), 9.1% (6.0-11%), respectively]. Statin lipid solubility did not affect the prevalence of SI [4.0% (2.0-5.0%) vs. 5.0% (4.0-6.0%)]. Age [odds ratio (OR) 1.33, P = 0.04], female gender (OR 1.47, P = 0.007), Asian and Black race (P < 0.05 for both), obesity (OR 1.30, P = 0.02), diabetes

AIMS: Statin intolerance (SI) represents a significant public health problem for which precise estimates of prevalence are needed. Statin intolerance remains an important clinical challenge, and it is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. This meta-analysis estimates the overall prevalence of SI, the prevalence according to different diagnostic criteria and in different disease settings, and identifies possible risk factors/conditions that might increase the risk of SI. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched several databases up to 31 May 2021, for studies that reported the prevalence of SI. The primary endpoint was overall prevalence and prevalence according to a range of diagnostic criteria [National Lipid Association (NLA), International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS)] and in different disease settings. The secondary endpoint was to identify possible risk factors for SI. A random-effects model was applied to estimate the overall pooled prevalence. A total of 176 studies [112 randomized controlled trials (RCTs); 64 cohort studies] with 4 143 517 patients were ultimately included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of SI was 9.1% (95% confidence interval 8.0-10%). The prevalence was similar when defined using NLA, ILEP, and EAS criteria [7.0% (6.0-8.0%), 6.7% (5.0-8.0%), 5.9% (4.0-7.0%), respectively]. The prevalence of SI in RCTs was significantly lower compared with cohort studies [4.9% (4.0-6.0%) vs. 17% (14-19%)]. The prevalence of SI in studies including both primary and secondary prevention patients was much higher than when primary or secondary prevention patients were analysed separately [18% (14-21%), 8.2% (6.0-10%), 9.1% (6.0-11%), respectively]. Statin lipid solubility did not affect the prevalence of SI [4.0% (2.0-5.0%) vs. 5.0% (4.0-6.0%)]. Age [odds ratio (OR) 1.33, P = 0.04], female gender (OR 1.47, P = 0.007), Asian and Black race (P < 0.05 for both), obesity (OR 1.30, P = 0.02), diabetes

Statin intolerance is a clinical syndrome whereby adverse effects (AEs) associated with statin therapy [most commonly statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS)] result in the discontinuation of therapy and consequently increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, complete statin intolerance occurs in only a small minority of treated patients (estimated prevalence of only 3–5%). Many perceived AEs are misattributed (e.g. physical musculoskeletal injury and inflammatory myopathies), and subjective symptoms occur as a result of the fact that patients expect them to do so when taking medicines (the nocebo/drucebo effect)—what might be truth even for over 50% of all patients with muscle weakness/pain. Clear guidance is necessary to enable the optimal management of plasma in real-world clinical practice in patients who experience subjective AEs. In this Position Paper of the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), we present a step-by-step patient-centred approach to the identification and management of SAMS with a particular focus on strategies to prevent and manage the nocebo/drucebo effect and to improve long-term compliance with lipid-lowering therapy.

AimsStatin intolerance (SI) represents a significant public health problem for which precise estimates of prevalence are needed. Statin intolerance remains an important clinical challenge, and it is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. This meta-analysis estimates the overall prevalence of SI, the prevalence according to different diagnostic criteria and in different disease settings, and identifies possible risk factors/conditions that might increase the risk of SI.Methods and resultsWe searched several databases up to 31 May 2021, for studies that reported the prevalence of SI. The primary endpoint was overall prevalence and prevalence according to a range of diagnostic criteria [National Lipid Association (NLA), International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS)] and in different disease settings. The secondary endpoint was to identify possible risk factors for SI. A random-effects model was applied to estimate the overall pooled prevalence. A total of 176 studies [112 randomized controlled trials (RCTs); 64 cohort studies] with 4 143 517 patients were ultimately included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of SI was 9.1% (95% confidence interval 8.0-10%). The prevalence was similar when defined using NLA, ILEP, and EAS criteria [7.0% (6.0-8.0%), 6.7% (5.0-8.0%), 5.9% (4.0-7.0%), respectively]. The prevalence of SI in RCTs was significantly lower compared with cohort studies [4.9% (4.0-6.0%) vs. 17% (14-19%)]. The prevalence of SI in studies including both primary and secondary prevention patients was much higher than when primary or secondary prevention patients were analysed separately [18% (14-21%), 8.2% (6.0-10%), 9.1% (6.0-11%), respectively]. Statin lipid solubility did not affect the prevalence of SI [4.0% (2.0-5.0%) vs. 5.0% (4.0-6.0%)]. Age [odds ratio (OR) 1.33, P = 0.04], female gender (OR 1.47, P = 0.007), Asian and Black race (P < 0.05 for both), obesity (OR 1.30, P = 0.02), diabetes mell

Statin intolerance is a clinical syndrome whereby adverse effects (AEs) associated with statin therapy [most commonly statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS)] result in the discontinuation of therapy and consequently increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, complete statin intolerance occurs in only a small minority of treated patients (estimated prevalence of only 3-5%). Many perceived AEs are misattributed (e.g. physical musculoskeletal injury and inflammatory myopathies), and subjective symptoms occur as a result of the fact that patients expect them to do so when taking medicines (the nocebo/drucebo effect)-what might be truth even for over 50% of all patients with muscle weakness/pain. Clear guidance is necessary to enable the optimal management of plasma in real-world clinical practice in patients who experience subjective AEs. In this Position Paper of the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), we present a step-by-step patient-centred approach to the identification and management of SAMS with a particular focus on strategies to prevent and manage the nocebo/drucebo effect and to improve long-term compliance with lipid-lowering therapy.

AIMS: Statin intolerance (SI) represents a significant public health problem for which precise estimates of prevalence are needed. Statin intolerance remains an important clinical challenge, and it is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. This meta-analysis estimates the overall prevalence of SI, the prevalence according to different diagnostic criteria and in different disease settings, and identifies possible risk factors/conditions that might increase the risk of SI. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched several databases up to 31 May 2021, for studies that reported the prevalence of SI. The primary endpoint was overall prevalence and prevalence according to a range of diagnostic criteria [National Lipid Association (NLA), International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS)] and in different disease settings. The secondary endpoint was to identify possible risk factors for SI. A random-effects model was applied to estimate the overall pooled prevalence. A total of 176 studies [112 randomized controlled trials (RCTs); 64 cohort studies] with 4 143 517 patients were ultimately included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of SI was 9.1% (95% confidence interval 8.0-10%). The prevalence was similar when defined using NLA, ILEP, and EAS criteria [7.0% (6.0-8.0%), 6.7% (5.0-8.0%), 5.9% (4.0-7.0%), respectively]. The prevalence of SI in RCTs was significantly lower compared with cohort studies [4.9% (4.0-6.0%) vs. 17% (14-19%)]. The prevalence of SI in studies including both primary and secondary prevention patients was much higher than when primary or secondary prevention patients were analysed separately [18% (14-21%), 8.2% (6.0-10%), 9.1% (6.0-11%), respectively]. Statin lipid solubility did not affect the prevalence of SI [4.0% (2.0-5.0%) vs. 5.0% (4.0-6.0%)]. Age [odds ratio (OR) 1.33, P = 0.04], female gender (OR 1.47, P = 0.007), Asian and Black race (P < 0.05 for both), obesity (OR 1.30, P = 0.02), diabetes

Statin intolerance is a clinical syndrome whereby adverse effects (AEs) associated with statin therapy [most commonly statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS)] result in the discontinuation of therapy and consequently increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, complete statin intolerance occurs in only a small minority of treated patients (estimated prevalence of only 3–5%). Many perceived AEs are misattributed (e.g. physical musculoskeletal injury and inflammatory myopathies), and subjective symptoms occur as a result of the fact that patients expect them to do so when taking medicines (the nocebo/drucebo effect)—what might be truth even for over 50% of all patients with muscle weakness/pain. Clear guidance is necessary to enable the optimal management of plasma in real-world clinical practice in patients who experience subjective AEs. In this Position Paper of the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), we present a step-by-step patient-centred approach to the identification and management of SAMS with a particular focus on strategies to prevent and manage the nocebo/drucebo effect and to improve long-term compliance with lipid-lowering therapy.

Statin intolerance is a clinical syndrome whereby adverse effects (AEs) associated with statin therapy [most commonly statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS)] result in the discontinuation of therapy and consequently increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, complete statin intolerance occurs in only a small minority of treated patients (estimated prevalence of only 3–5%). Many perceived AEs are misattributed (e.g. physical musculoskeletal injury and inflammatory myopathies), and subjective symptoms occur as a result of the fact that patients expect them to do so when taking medicines (the nocebo/drucebo effect)—what might be truth even for over 50% of all patients with muscle weakness/pain. Clear guidance is necessary to enable the optimal management of plasma in real-world clinical practice in patients who experience subjective AEs. In this Position Paper of the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), we present a step-by-step patient-centred approach to the identification and management of SAMS with a particular focus on strategies to prevent and manage the nocebo/drucebo effect and to improve long-term compliance with lipid-lowering therapy.

AIMS: Statin intolerance (SI) represents a significant public health problem for which precise estimates of prevalence are needed. Statin intolerance remains an important clinical challenge, and it is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. This meta-analysis estimates the overall prevalence of SI, the prevalence according to different diagnostic criteria and in different disease settings, and identifies possible risk factors/conditions that might increase the risk of SI. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched several databases up to 31 May 2021, for studies that reported the prevalence of SI. The primary endpoint was overall prevalence and prevalence according to a range of diagnostic criteria [National Lipid Association (NLA), International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), and European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS)] and in different disease settings. The secondary endpoint was to identify possible risk factors for SI. A random-effects model was applied to estimate the overall pooled prevalence. A total of 176 studies [112 randomized controlled trials (RCTs); 64 cohort studies] with 4 143 517 patients were ultimately included in the analysis. The overall prevalence of SI was 9.1% (95% confidence interval 8.0-10%). The prevalence was similar when defined using NLA, ILEP, and EAS criteria [7.0% (6.0-8.0%), 6.7% (5.0-8.0%), 5.9% (4.0-7.0%), respectively]. The prevalence of SI in RCTs was significantly lower compared with cohort studies [4.9% (4.0-6.0%) vs. 17% (14-19%)]. The prevalence of SI in studies including both primary and secondary prevention patients was much higher than when primary or secondary prevention patients were analysed separately [18% (14-21%), 8.2% (6.0-10%), 9.1% (6.0-11%), respectively]. Statin lipid solubility did not affect the prevalence of SI [4.0% (2.0-5.0%) vs. 5.0% (4.0-6.0%)]. Age [odds ratio (OR) 1.33, P = 0.04], female gender (OR 1.47, P = 0.007), Asian and Black race (P < 0.05 for both), obesity (OR 1.30, P = 0.02), diabetes

Statin intolerance is a clinical syndrome whereby adverse effects (AEs) associated with statin therapy [most commonly statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS)] result in the discontinuation of therapy and consequently increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes. However, complete statin intolerance occurs in only a small minority of treated patients (estimated prevalence of only 3–5%). Many perceived AEs are misattributed (e.g. physical musculoskeletal injury and inflammatory myopathies), and subjective symptoms occur as a result of the fact that patients expect them to do so when taking medicines (the nocebo/drucebo effect)—what might be truth even for over 50% of all patients with muscle weakness/pain. Clear guidance is necessary to enable the optimal management of plasma in real-world clinical practice in patients who experience subjective AEs. In this Position Paper of the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), we present a step-by-step patient-centred approach to the identification and management of SAMS with a particular focus on strategies to prevent and manage the nocebo/drucebo effect and to improve long-term compliance with lipid-lowering therapy.

Proteins play a crucial role in metabolism, in maintaining fluid and acid-base balance and antibody synthesis. Dietary proteins are important nutrients and are classified into: 1) animal proteins (meat, fish, poultry, eggs and dairy), and, 2) plant proteins (legumes, nuts and soy). Dietary modification is one of the most important lifestyle changes that has been shown to significantly decrease the risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD) by attenuating related risk factors. The CVD burden is reduced by optimum diet through replacement of unprocessed meat with low saturated fat, animal proteins and plant proteins. In view of the available evidence, it has become acceptable to emphasize the role of optimum nutrition to maintain arterial and CV health. Such healthy diets are thought to increase satiety, facilitate weight loss, and improve CV risk. Different studies have compared the benefits of omnivorous and vegetarian diets. Animal protein related risk has been suggested to be greater with red or processed meat over and above poultry, fish and nuts, which carry a lower risk for CVD. In contrast, others have shown no association of red meat intake with CVD. The aim of this expert opinion recommendation was to elucidate the different impact of animal vs vegetable protein on modifying cardiometabolic risk factors. Many observational and interventional studies confirmed that increasing protein intake, especially plant-based proteins and certain animal-based proteins (poultry, fish, unprocessed red meat low in saturated fats and low-fat dairy products) have a positive effect in modifying cardiometabolic risk factors. Red meat intake correlates with increased CVD risk, mainly because of its non-protein ingredients (saturated fats). However, the way red meat is cooked and preserved matters. Thus, it is recommended to substitute red meat with poultry or fish in order to lower CVD risk. Specific amino acids have favourable results in modifying major risk factors for CVD, suc

Proteins play a crucial role in metabolism, in maintaining fluid and acid-base balance and antibody synthesis. Dietary proteins are important nutrients and are classified into: 1) animal proteins (meat, fish, poultry, eggs and dairy), and, 2) plant proteins (legumes, nuts and soy). Dietary modification is one of the most important lifestyle changes that has been shown to significantly decrease the risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD) by attenuating related risk factors. The CVD burden is reduced by optimum diet through replacement of unprocessed meat with low saturated fat, animal proteins and plant proteins. In view of the available evidence, it has become acceptable to emphasize the role of optimum nutrition to maintain arterial and CV health. Such healthy diets are thought to increase satiety, facilitate weight loss, and improve CV risk. Different studies have compared the benefits of omnivorous and vegetarian diets. Animal protein related risk has been suggested to be greater with red or processed meat over and above poultry, fish and nuts, which carry a lower risk for CVD. In contrast, others have shown no association of red meat intake with CVD. The aim of this expert opinion recommendation was to elucidate the different impact of animal vs vegetable protein on modifying cardiometabolic risk factors. Many observational and interventional studies confirmed that increasing protein intake, especially plant-based proteins and certain animal-based proteins (poultry, fish, unprocessed red meat low in saturated fats and low-fat dairy products) have a positive effect in modifying cardiometabolic risk factors. Red meat intake correlates with increased CVD risk, mainly because of its non-protein ingredients (saturated fats). However, the way red meat is cooked and preserved matters. Thus, it is recommended to substitute red meat with poultry or fish in order to lower CVD risk. Specific amino acids have favourable results in modifying major risk factors for CVD, suc

Acute and chronic physical exercises may enhance the development of statin-related myopathy. In this context, the recent (2019) guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) for the management of dyslipidemias recommend that, although individuals with dyslipidemia should be advised to engage in regular moderate physical exercise (for at least 30 min daily), physicians should be alerted with regard to myopathy and creatine kinase (CK) elevation in statin-treated sport athletes. However it is worth emphasizing that abovementioned guidelines, previous and recent ESC/EAS consensus papers on adverse effects of statin therapy as well as other previous attempts on this issue, including the ones from the International Lipid Expert Panel (ILEP), give only general recommendations on how to manage patients requiring statin therapy on regular exercises. Therefore, these guidelines in the form of the Position Paper are the first such an attempt to summary existing, often scarce knowledge, and to present this important issue in the form of step-by-step practical recommendations. It is critically important as we might observe more and more individuals on regular exercises/athletes requiring statin therapy due to their cardiovascular risk.

The endothelium consists of a monolayer of Endothelial Cells (ECs) which form the inner cellular lining of veins, arteries, capillaries and lymphatic vessels. ECs interact with the blood and lymph. The endothelium fulfils functions such as vasodilatation, regulation of adhesion, infiltration of leukocytes, inhibition of platelet adhesion, vessel remodeling and lipoprotein metabolism. ECs synthesize and release compounds such as Nitric Oxide (NO), metabolites of arachidonic acid, Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) and enzymes that degrade the extracellular matrix. Endothelial dysfunction represents a phenotype prone to atherogenesis and may be used as a marker of atherosclerotic risk. Such dysfunction includes impaired synthesis and availability of NO and an imbalance in the relative contribution of endothelial-derived relaxing factors and contracting factors such as endothelin-1 and angiotensin. This dysfunction appears before the earliest anatomic evidence of atherosclerosis and could be an important initial step in further development of atherosclerosis. Endothelial dysfunction was historically treated with vitamin C supplementation and L-arginine supplementation. Short term improvement of the expression of adhesion molecule and endothelial function during antioxidant therapy has been observed. Statins are used in the treatment of hyperlipidaemia, a risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Future studies should focus on identifying the mechanisms involved in the beneficial effects of statins on the endothelium. This may help develop drugs specifically aimed at endothelial dysfunction. © 2020 Bentham Science Publishers.

The endothelium consists of a monolayer of Endothelial Cells (ECs) which form the inner cellular lining of veins, arteries, capillaries and lymphatic vessels. ECs interact with the blood and lymph. The endothelium fulfils functions such as vasodilatation, regulation of adhesion, infiltration of leukocytes, inhibition of platelet adhesion, vessel remodeling and lipoprotein metabolism. ECs synthesize and release compounds such as Nitric Oxide (NO), metabolites of arachidonic acid, Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) and enzymes that degrade the extracellular matrix. Endothelial dysfunction represents a phenotype prone to atherogenesis and may be used as a marker of atherosclerotic risk. Such dysfunction includes impaired synthesis and availability of NO and an imbalance in the relative contribution of endothelial-derived relaxing factors and contracting factors such as endothelin-1 and angiotensin. This dysfunction appears before the earliest anatomic evidence of atherosclerosis and could be an important initial step in further development of atherosclerosis. Endothelial dysfunction was historically treated with vitamin C supplementation and L-arginine supplementation. Short term improvement of the expression of adhesion molecule and endothelial function during antioxidant therapy has been observed. Statins are used in the treatment of hyperlipidaemia, a risk factor for cardiovascular disease. Future studies should focus on identifying the mechanisms involved in the beneficial effects of statins on the endothelium. This may help develop drugs specifically aimed at endothelial dysfunction. © 2020 Bentham Science Publishers.

Postprandial hypertriglyceridaemia, defined as an increase in plasma triglyceride-containing lipoproteins following a fat meal, is a potential risk predictor of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and other chronic diseases. Several non-modifiable factors (genetics, age, sex and menopausal status) and lifestyle factors (diet, physical activity, smoking status, obesity, alcohol and medication use) may influence postprandial hypertriglyceridaemia. This narrative review considers the studies published over the last decade that evaluated postprandial hypertriglyceridaemia. Additionally, the genetic determinants of postprandial plasma triglyceride levels, the types of meals for studying postprandial triglyceride response, and underlying conditions (e.g. familial dyslipidaemias, diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome, non-alcoholic fatty liver and chronic kidney disease) that are associated with postprandial hypertriglyceridaemia are reviewed; therapeutic aspects are also considered.

Residual vascular risk exists despite the aggressive lowering of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol (LDL-C). A contributor to this residual risk may be elevated fasting, or non-fasting, levels of Triglyceride (TG)-rich lipoproteins. Therefore, there is a need to establish whethe a standardised Oral Fat Tolerance Test (OFTT) can improve atherosclerotic Cardiovascular (CV) Disease (ASCVD) risk prediction in addition to a fasting or non-fasting lipid profile. An expert panel considered the role of postprandial hypertriglyceridaemia (as represented by an OFTT) in predicting ASCVD. The panel updated its 2011 statement by considering new studies and various patient categories. The recommendations are based on expert opinion since no strict endpoint trials have been performed. Individuals with fasting TG concentration <1 mmol/L (89 mg/dL) commonly do not have an abnormal response to an OFTT. In contrast, those with fasting TG concentration ≥2 mmol/L (175 mg/dL) or nonfasting ≥2.3 mmol/L (200 mg/dL) will usually have an abnormal response. We recommend considering postprandial hypertriglyceridaemia testing when fasting TG concentrations and non-fasting TG concentrations are 1-2 mmol/L (89-175 mg/dL) and 1.3-2.3 mmol/L (115-200 mg/dL), respectively as an additional investigation for metabolic risk prediction along with other risk factors (obesity, current tobacco abuse, metabolic syndrome, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus). The panel proposes that an abnormal TG response to an OFTT (consisting of 75 g fat, 25 g carbohydrate and 10 g proteins) is >2.5 mmol/L (220 mg/dL). Postprandial hypertriglyceridaemia is an emerging factor that may contribute to residual CV risk. This possibility requires further research. A standardised OFTT will allow comparisons between investigational studies. We acknowledge that the OFTT will be mainly used for research to further clarify the role of TG in relation to CV risk. For routine practice, there is a considerable support for the

Statins are the most common drugs administered for patients with cardiovascular disease. However, due to statin-associated muscle symptoms, adherence to statin therapy is challenging in clinical practice. Certain nutraceuticals, such as red yeast rice, bergamot, berberine, artichoke, soluble fiber, and plant sterols and stanols alone or in combination with each other, as well as with ezetimibe, might be considered as an alternative or add-on therapy to statins, although there is still insufficient evidence available with respect to long-term safety and effectiveness on cardiovascular disease prevention and treatment. These nutraceuticals could exert significant lipid-lowering activity and might present multiple non-lipid-lowering actions, including improvement of endothelial dysfunction and arterial stiffness, as well as anti-inflammatory and antioxidative properties. The aim of this expert opinion paper is to provide the first attempt at recommendation on the management of statin intolerance through the use of nutraceuticals with particular attention on those with effective low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction.

Introduction: Obesity and inadequate vitamin D status are associated with endothelial dysfunction and cardiovascular disease. We evaluated the associations between vitamin D status (i.e. serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D)), biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction (i.e. serum concentrations of soluble intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (sICAM-1) and soluble E-selectin (sE-selectin)), inflammatory markers (i.e. high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) and fibrinogen) and cardiometabolic risk factors. Material and methods: Fifty obese (body mass index (BMI) GT = 30 kg/m(2)) non-diabetic adults (mean age: 36.2 +/- 5.4 years) without pre-existing cardiovascular abnormalities and 25 clinically healthy, normal weight and age matched individuals were included. Anthropometric parameters, markers of glucose and lipid metabolism, and serum levels of inflammatory and endothelial dysfunction biomarkers were assessed in all subjects. Results: The mean serum 25(OH)D level was significantly lower in the obese group than in controls (33.5 +/- 15.2 vs. 60.1 +/- 23.1 nmol/l; p LT 0.001). In the obese group, sE-selectin (36.4 (32.1-47.2) vs. 32.4 (24.6-35.5) ng/ml, p LT 0.05) and hsCRP (6.0 +/- 3.4 vs. 3.5 1.0 mg/l, p LT 0.05) were significantly higher in individuals with lower than median vitamin D levels (i.e. 31 nmol/l) compared with those with higher vitamin D levels. In multivariable linear regression analysis, hsCRP (beta = 0.43; p LT 0.001) and sE-selectin (beta = 0.30; p = 0.03) were independently and significantly associated with serum 25(OH)D levels in the obese group. Conclusions: Vitamin D levels may be related to increased levels of biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction and inflammation in obese non-diabetic individuals.

BackgroundTo investigate the association between dietary patterns (DP), plasma vitamins and trans fatty acids (TFAs) with the likelihood of peripheral artery disease (PAD).MethodsNational Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data for the years 1999-2002 were used. PAD was diagnosed by ankle brachial index assessment. Plasma concentrations of vitamins were measured using high performance liquid chromatography. Vitamin D levels were measured by radioimmunoassay. Analysis of covariance, principal components analysis (PCA) and adjusted logistic regression were applied, accounting for the survey design and sample weights.ResultsOf the 4864 eligible participants, 2482 (51.0%) were men and 269 (5.5%) had prevalent PAD. PCA uncovered three DPs which accounted for 56.8% of the variance in dietary nutrients consumption including DP1 (fatty acids and cholesterol), DP2 (minerals, vitamins and fiber), and DP3 (polyunsaturated fatty acids [PUFA]). PAD patients had a significantly higher serum concentrations of trans 9-octadecenoic acid and trans 9, trans 12-octadienoic acid as well as lower plasma levels of vitamin D, retinol, retinyl stearate and retinyl palmitate (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). In models adjusted for age, race, diabetes, cholesterol, hypertension, smoking and energy intake, individuals in the highest quartile of the DP1 had higher odds for PAD compared with those in the lowest quartile [(odds ratio (OR): 6.43, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.00-20.63 p < 0.001], while those in the highest quartile of DP2 and DP3 had lower odds of PAD relative to those in the lowest quartile (OR:0.28, OR:0.44, respectively; p < 0.001 for both comparisons).ConclusionWe found that quality of diet, plasma vitamins and TFAs are associated with the likelihood of PAD. If confirmed in prospective studies, the possibility that dietary factors, plasma vitamins and TFAs might be valuable for preventing or delaying the clinical progression of PAD, should be investigat

Introduction: Obesity and inadequate vitamin D status are associated with endothelial dysfunction and cardiovascular disease. We evaluated the associations between vitamin D status (i.e. serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D)), biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction (i.e. serum concentrations of soluble intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (sICAM-1) and soluble E-selectin (sE-selectin)), inflammatory markers (i.e. high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) and fibrinogen) and cardiometabolic risk factors. Material and methods: Fifty obese (body mass index (BMI) GT = 30 kg/m(2)) non-diabetic adults (mean age: 36.2 +/- 5.4 years) without pre-existing cardiovascular abnormalities and 25 clinically healthy, normal weight and age matched individuals were included. Anthropometric parameters, markers of glucose and lipid metabolism, and serum levels of inflammatory and endothelial dysfunction biomarkers were assessed in all subjects. Results: The mean serum 25(OH)D level was significantly lower in the obese group than in controls (33.5 +/- 15.2 vs. 60.1 +/- 23.1 nmol/l; p LT 0.001). In the obese group, sE-selectin (36.4 (32.1-47.2) vs. 32.4 (24.6-35.5) ng/ml, p LT 0.05) and hsCRP (6.0 +/- 3.4 vs. 3.5 1.0 mg/l, p LT 0.05) were significantly higher in individuals with lower than median vitamin D levels (i.e. 31 nmol/l) compared with those with higher vitamin D levels. In multivariable linear regression analysis, hsCRP (beta = 0.43; p LT 0.001) and sE-selectin (beta = 0.30; p = 0.03) were independently and significantly associated with serum 25(OH)D levels in the obese group. Conclusions: Vitamin D levels may be related to increased levels of biomarkers of endothelial dysfunction and inflammation in obese non-diabetic individuals.

Ugo Fedeli,1 Alfredo De Giorgi,2 Nicola Gennaro,1 Eliana Ferroni,1 Massimo Gallerani,3 Dimitri P Mikhailidis,4 Roberto Manfredini,2 Fabio Fabbian2 1Epidemiological Department, Veneto Region, 2Department of Medical Sciences, Clinica Medica Unit, School of Medicine, University of Ferrara, 3Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy; 4Department of Clinical Biochemistry (Vascular Disease Prevention Clinic), University College London Medical School, London, UK Background: COPD is among the major causes of death, and it is associated with several comorbid conditions. Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is frequently diagnosed in older people living in Western societies and could impact COPD patients’ mortality. We evaluated the relationship between burden of comorbidities, CKD, and mortality in a population-based cohort of patients discharged with a diagnosis of COPD.Methods: A longitudinal cohort study was conducted evaluating 27,272 COPD patients. Recruitment of COPD subjects and identification of CKD and other comorbidities summarized by the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) were based on claims data coded according to the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM). Severity of COPD was classified by hospital diagnosis or exemption from medical charges due to respiratory failure or previous hospitalizations for COPD. The impact of comorbidities on survival was assessed by Cox regression.Results: Less than 40% of patients were still alive at the end of a median follow-up of 37 months (17 months for patients who died and 56 months for those alive at the end of follow-up). After adjustment for age, gender, and severity score of COPD, CKD (hazard ratio =1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.30–1.42) independently from comorbidities summarized by the CCI was a significant risk factor for mortality.Conclusion: In spite of limitations due to the use of

The importance of metabolic syndrome (MetS) lies in its associated risk of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes, as well as other harmful conditions such as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. In this report, the available scientific evidence on the associations between lifestyle changes and MetS and its components is reviewed to derive recommendations for MetS prevention and management. Weight loss through an energy-restricted diet together with increased energy expenditure through physical activity contribute to the prevention and treatment of MetS. A Mediterranean-type diet, with or without energy restriction, is an effective treatment component. This dietary pattern should be built upon an increased intake of unsaturated fat, primarily from olive oil, and emphasize the consumption of legumes, cereals (whole grains), fruits, vegetables, nuts, fish, and low-fat dairy products, as well as moderate consumption of alcohol. Other dietary patterns (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension, new Nordic, and vegetarian diets) have also been proposed as alternatives for preventing MetS. Quitting smoking and reducing intake of sugar-sweetened beverages and meat and meat products are mandatory. Nevertheless, there are inconsistencies and gaps in the evidence, and additional research is needed to define the most appropriate therapies for MetS. In conclusion, a healthy lifestyle is critical to prevent or delay the onset of MetS in susceptible individuals and to prevent cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes in those with existing MetS. The recommendations provided in this article should help patients and clinicians understand and implement the most effective approaches for lifestyle change to prevent MetS and improve cardiometabolic health.© The Author(s) 2017. Published by

Quercetin, the most abundant dietary flavonol, has antioxidant effects in cardiovascular disease, but the evidence regarding its effects on blood pressure (BP) has not been conclusive. We assessed the impact of quercetin on BP through a systematic review and meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials. We searched PUBMED, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and EMBASE up to January 31, 2015 to identify placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of quercetin on BP. Meta-analysis was performed using either a fixed-effects or random-effect model according to I(2) statistic. Effect size was expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% CI. Overall, the impact of quercetin on BP was reported in 7 trials comprising 9 treatment arms (587 patients). The results of the meta-analysis showed significant reductions both in systolic BP (WMD: -3.04 mm Hg, 95% CI: -5.75, -0.33, P=0.028) and diastolic BP (WMD: -2.63 mm Hg, 95% CI: -3.26, -2.01, P<0.001) following supplementation with quercetin. When the studies were categorized according to the quercetin dose, there was a significant systolic BP and diastolic BP-reducing effect in randomized controlled trials with doses ≥500 mg/day (WMD: -4.45 mm Hg, 95% CI: -7.70, -1.21, P=0.007 and -2.98 mm Hg, 95% CI: -3.64, -2.31, P<0.001, respectively), and lack of a significant effect for doses <500 mg/day (WMD: -1.59 mm Hg, 95% CI: -4.44, 1.25, P=0.273 and -0.24 mm Hg, 95% CI: -2.00, 1.52, P=0.788, respectively), but indirect comparison tests failed to significant differences between doses. The results of the meta-analysis showed a statistically significant effect of quercetin supplementation in the reduction of BP, possibly limited to, or greater with dosages of >500 mg/day. Further studies are necessary to investigate the clinical relevance of these results and the possibility of quercetin application as an add-on to

There is accumulating evidence that risk profiles differ between coronary artery disease and abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). However, diabetes mellitus (DM) appears to be negatively associated with AAA formation. The underlying mechanisms for this negative relationship are far from defined, but may include: increased arterial wall matrix formation via advanced glycation end products; suppression of plasmin and reduction of levels and activity of matrix metalloproteinases (MMP)-2 and 9; diminished aortic wall macrophage infiltration, elastolysis and neovascularization. In addition, the effect of pharmacological agents used for the treatment of patients with DM on AAA formation has been studied with rather controversial results. Statins, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, fenofibrate, antibiotics and some hypoglycemic agents are beginning to be appreciated for a potential modest protection from AAAs, but further studies are needed. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

There is accumulating evidence that risk profiles differ between coronary artery disease and abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). However, diabetes mellitus (DM) appears to be negatively associated with AAA formation. The underlying mechanisms for this negative relationship are far from defined, but may include: increased arterial wall matrix formation via advanced glycation end products; suppression of plasmin and reduction of levels and activity of matrix metalloproteinases (MMP)-2 and 9; diminished aortic wall macrophage infiltration, elastolysis and neovascularization. In addition, the effect of pharmacological agents used for the treatment of patients with DM on AAA formation has been studied with rather controversial results. Statins, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, fenofibrate, antibiotics and some hypoglycemic agents are beginning to be appreciated for a potential modest protection from AAAs, but further studies are needed. (C) 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

While risk scores are invaluable tools for adapted preventive strategies, a significant gap exists between predicted and actual event rates. Additional tools to further stratify the risk of patients at an individual level are biomarkers. A surrogate endpoint is a biomarker that is intended as a substitute for a clinical endpoint. In order to be considered as a surrogate endpoint of cardiovascular events, a biomarker should satisfy several criteria, such as proof of concept, prospective validation, incremental value, clinical utility, clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, ease of use, methodological consensus, and reference values. We scrutinized the role of peripheral (i.e. not related to coronary circulation) noninvasive vascular biomarkers for primary and secondary cardiovascular disease prevention. Most of the biomarkers examined fit within the concept of early vascular aging. Biomarkers that fulfill most of the criteria and, therefore, are close to being considered a clinical surrogate endpoint are carotid ultrasonography, ankle-brachial index and carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity; biomarkers that fulfill some, but not all of the criteria are brachial ankle pulse wave velocity, central haemodynamics/wave reflections and C-reactive protein; biomarkers that do no not at present fulfill essential criteria are flow-mediated dilation, endothelial peripheral arterial tonometry, oxidized LDL and dysfunctional HDL. Nevertheless, it is still unclear whether a specific vascular biomarker is overly superior. A prospective study in which all vascular biomarkers are measured is still lacking. In selected cases, the combined assessment of more than one biomarker may be required.

In humans uric acid (UA) is the end product of degradation of purines. The handling of UA by the renal system is a complex process which is not fully understood. To date, several urate transporters in the renal proximal tubule have been identified. Among them, urate transporter 1 (URAT1) and a glucose transporter 9 (GLUT9) are considered of greater importance, as potential targets for treatment of hyperuricemia and the potential associated cardio-metabolic risk. Therefore, the recognition of the metabolic pathway of UA and elucidation of occurrence of hyperuricemia may provide important insights about the relationship between UA, pre-hypertension (preHT) and the metabolic syndrome (MetS). We also review the available clinical studies in this field, including experimental studies dealing with the mechanisms of UA transport via different transporters, as well as current treatment options for hyperuricemia in patients with MetS, preHT or cardiovascular risk factors.

In humans uric acid (UA) is the end product of degradation of purines. The handling of UA by the renal system is a complex process which is not fully understood. To date, several urate transporters in the renal proximal tubule have been identified. Among them, urate transporter 1 (URAT1) and a glucose transporter 9 (GLUT9) are considered of greater importance, as potential targets for treatment of hyperuricemia and the potential associated cardio-metabolic risk. Therefore, the recognition of the metabolic pathway of UA and elucidation of occurrence of hyperuricemia may provide important insights about the relationship between UA, pre-hypertension (preHT) and the metabolic syndrome (MetS). We also review the available clinical studies in this field, including experimental studies dealing with the mechanisms of UA transport via different transporters, as well as current treatment options for hyperuricemia in patients with MetS, preHT or cardiovascular risk factors.

In humans uric acid (UA) is the end product of degradation of purines. The handling of UA by the renal system is a complex process which is not fully understood. To date, several urate transporters in the renal proximal tubule have been identified. Among them, urate transporter 1 (URAT1) and a glucose transporter 9 (GLUT9) are considered of greater importance, as potential targets for treatment of hyperuricemia and the potential associated cardio-metabolic risk. Therefore, the recognition of the metabolic pathway of UA and elucidation of occurrence of hyperuricemia may provide important insights about the relationship between UA, pre-hypertension (preHT) and the metabolic syndrome (MetS). We also review the available clinical studies in this field, including experimental studies dealing with the mechanisms of UA transport via different transporters, as well as current treatment options for hyperuricemia in patients with MetS, preHT or cardiovascular risk factors.

Small, dense low density lipoprotein (sdLDL) represents an emerging cardiovascular risk factor, since these particles can be associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) independently of established risk factors, including plasma lipids. Obese subjects frequently have atherogenic dyslipidaemia, including elevated sdLDL levels, in addition to elevated triglycerides (TG), very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) and apolipoprotein-B, as well as decreased high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels. Obesity-related co-morbidities, such as metabolic syndrome (MetS) are also characterized by dyslipidaemia. Therefore, agents that favourably modulate LDL subclasses may be of clinical value in these subjects. Statins are the lipid-lowering drug of choice. Also, anti-obesity and lipid lowering drugs other than statins could be useful in these patients. However, the effects of anti-obesity drugs on CVD risk factors remain unclear. We review the clinical significance of sdLDL in being overweight and obesity, as well as the efficacy of anti-obesity drugs on LDL subfractions in these individuals; a short comment on HDL subclasses is also included. Our literature search was based on PubMed and Scopus listings. Further research is required to fully explore both the significance of sdLDL and the efficacy of anti-obesity drugs on LDL subfractions in being overweight, obesity and MetS. Improving the lipoprotein profile in these patients may represent an efficient approach for reducing cardiovascular risk.

Ghrelin is a peptide hormone produced mainly in the stomach that has widespread tissue distribution and diverse hormonal, metabolic and cardiovascular activities. The circulating ghrelin concentration increases during fasting and decreases after food intake. Ghrelin secretion may thus be initiated by food intake and is possibly controlled by nutritional factors. Lean subjects have increased levels of circulating ghrelin compared with obese subjects. Recent reports show that low plasma ghrelin is associated with elevated fasting insulin levels, insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Factors involved in the regulation of ghrelin secretion have not yet been defined; however, it is assumed that blood glucose levels represent a significant regulator. Recent evidence indicates that ghrelin can increase myocardial contractility, enhance vasodilatation, and has protective effect from myocardial damage. It has been shown that ghrelin may improve cardiac function through growth hormone (GH)-dependent mechanisms but there is also evidence to suggest that ghrelins cardioprotective activity is independent of GH. Recent data demonstrate that ghrelin can influence key events in atherogenesis. Thus, ghrelin may be a new target for the treatment of some cardiovascular diseases. In this review, we consider the current literature focusing on ghrelin as a potential antiatherogenic agent in the treatment of various pathophysiological conditions.

Plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is one of the biomarkers of cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. LDL is cleared from the circulation preferentially through the LDL receptor (LDLR) pathway. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) promotes the degradation of the LDLR. PCSK9 inhibition is attractive as a new strategy for lowering LDL-C levels, especially in combination with lipid lowering drugs such as statins. We review data from the available studies which focus on PCSK9 as a potential target in the treatment of hyperlipidemia. Further studies are still necessary to investigate the potential underlying mechanisms involved.

Small, dense low density lipoprotein (sdLDL) represents an emerging cardiovascular risk factor, since these particles can be associated with cardiovascular disease (CVD) independently of established risk factors, including plasma lipids. Obese subjects frequently have atherogenic dyslipidaemia, including elevated sdLDL levels, in addition to elevated triglycerides (TG), very low density lipoprotein (VLDL) and apolipoprotein-B, as well as decreased high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels. Obesity-related co-morbidities, such as metabolic syndrome (MetS) are also characterized by dyslipidaemia. Therefore, agents that favourably modulate LDL subclasses may be of clinical value in these subjects. Statins are the lipid-lowering drug of choice. Also, anti-obesity and lipid lowering drugs other than statins could be useful in these patients. However, the effects of anti-obesity drugs on CVD risk factors remain unclear. We review the clinical significance of sdLDL in being overweight and obesity, as well as the efficacy of anti-obesity drugs on LDL subfractions in these individuals; a short comment on HDL subclasses is also included. Our literature search was based on PubMed and Scopus listings. Further research is required to fully explore both the significance of sdLDL and the efficacy of anti-obesity drugs on LDL subfractions in being overweight, obesity and MetS. Improving the lipoprotein profile in these patients may represent an efficient approach for reducing cardiovascular risk.

Ghrelin is a peptide hormone produced mainly in the stomach that has widespread tissue distribution and diverse hormonal, metabolic and cardiovascular activities. The circulating ghrelin concentration increases during fasting and decreases after food intake. Ghrelin secretion may thus be initiated by food intake and is possibly controlled by nutritional factors. Lean subjects have increased levels of circulating ghrelin compared with obese subjects. Recent reports show that low plasma ghrelin is associated with elevated fasting insulin levels, insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Factors involved in the regulation of ghrelin secretion have not yet been defined; however, it is assumed that blood glucose levels represent a significant regulator. Recent evidence indicates that ghrelin can increase myocardial contractility, enhance vasodilatation, and has protective effect from myocardial damage. It has been shown that ghrelin may improve cardiac function through growth hormone (GH)-dependent mechanisms but there is also evidence to suggest that ghrelins cardioprotective activity is independent of GH. Recent data demonstrate that ghrelin can influence key events in atherogenesis. Thus, ghrelin may be a new target for the treatment of some cardiovascular diseases. In this review, we consider the current literature focusing on ghrelin as a potential antiatherogenic agent in the treatment of various pathophysiological conditions.

In coronary artery disease the G protein related kinases (GRKs) play a role in desensitization of beta-adrenoreceptors (AR) after coronary occlusion. Targeted deletion and lowering of cardiac myocyte GRK-2 decreases the risk of post-ischemic heart failure (HF). Studies carried out in humans confirm the role of GRK-2 as a marker for the progression of HF after myocardial infarction (MI). The level of GRK-2 could be an indicator of beta-AR blocker efficacy in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Elevated levels of GRK-2 are an early ubiquitous consequence of myocardial injury. In hypertension an increased level of GRK-2 was reported in both animal models and human studies. The role of GRKs in vagally mediated disorders such as vasovagal syncope and atrial fibrillation remains controversial. The role of GRKs in the pathogenesis of neurocardiological diseases provides an insight into the molecular pathogenesis process, opens potential therapeutic options and suggests new directions for scientific research.

In coronary artery disease the G protein related kinases (GRKs) play a role in desensitization of beta-adrenoreceptors (AR) after coronary occlusion. Targeted deletion and lowering of cardiac myocyte GRK-2 decreases the risk of post-ischemic heart failure (HF). Studies carried out in humans confirm the role of GRK-2 as a marker for the progression of HF after myocardial infarction (MI). The level of GRK-2 could be an indicator of beta-AR blocker efficacy in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Elevated levels of GRK-2 are an early ubiquitous consequence of myocardial injury. In hypertension an increased level of GRK-2 was reported in both animal models and human studies. The role of GRKs in vagally mediated disorders such as vasovagal syncope and atrial fibrillation remains controversial. The role of GRKs in the pathogenesis of neurocardiological diseases provides an insight into the molecular pathogenesis process, opens potential therapeutic options and suggests new directions for scientific research.