Search

Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death in patients with diabetes. Cardiovascular disease in diabetes is multifactorial, and control of the cardiovascular risk factors leads to substantial reductions in cardiovascular events. The 2015 American Heart Association and American Diabetes Association scientific statement, "Update on Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Light of Recent Evidence," highlighted the importance of modifying various risk factors responsible for cardiovascular disease in diabetes. At the time, there was limited evidence to suggest that glucose-lowering medications reduce the risk of cardiovascular events. At present, several large randomized controlled trials with newer antihyperglycemic agents have been completed, demonstrating cardiovascular safety and reduction in cardiovascular outcomes, including cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure. This AHA scientific statement update focuses on (1) the evidence and clinical utility of newer antihyperglycemic agents in improving glycemic control and reducing cardiovascular events in diabetes; (2) the impact of blood pressure control on cardiovascular events in diabetes; and (3) the role of newer lipid-lowering therapies in comprehensive cardiovascular risk management in adults with diabetes. This scientific statement addresses the continued importance of lifestyle interventions, pharmacological therapy, and surgical interventions to curb the epidemic of obesity and metabolic syndrome, important precursors of prediabetes, diabetes, and comorbid cardiovascular disease. Last, this scientific statement explores the critical importance of the social determinants of health and health equity in the continuum of care in diabetes and cardiovascular disease. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of death and disability among people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), presenting a significant impact on longevity, patient quality of life, and health care costs. In the United States, attainment of recommended glycemic targets is low and T2D-related cardiovascular complications remain a significant burden. Many glucose-lowering treatment options are available, but glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors are recommended in recent guidelines as the preferred add-on therapy to metformin to improve glycemic control. This is particularly the case for patients with T2D and established atherosclerotic CVD, at high risk of atherosclerotic CVD, and/or with chronic kidney disease. Recommendations were based on GLP-1RA and SGLT-2 inhibitor cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs), which consistently showed that these agents pose no additional cardiovascular risk compared with placebo. Three GLP-1RAs (liraglutide, dulaglutide, and subcutaneous semaglutide) demonstrated significantly lower major adverse cardiovascular events versus placebo and are now approved for this indication. However, to realize improvement in outcomes in the clinical setting, organized, systematic, and coordinated approaches to patient management are also needed. For example, nurse-led diabetes self-management education and support programs have been shown to be effective. This article explores T2D management with emphasis on cardiovascular risk and CVOTs performed to date and reviews the clinical experience with GLP-1RAs for managing hyperglycemia and their impact on cardiovascular risk. In addition, practical guidance is given for key health care providers involved in the care of patients with T2D with cardiovascular risk outside of diabetes clinics/endocrinology centers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Little is known about associations of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) with outcomes in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (EF).Of the 10 570 hospitalized patients with heart failure and preserved EF, ≥65 years, EF ≥40%, in the Organized Program to Initiate Lifesaving Treatment in Hospitalized Patients with Heart Failure (OPTIMIZE-HF; 2003-2004), linked to Medicare data (through December 31, 2008), 7514 had no prior history of CCB use. Of these, 815 (11%) patients received new discharge prescriptions for CCBs. Propensity scores for CCB initiation, calculated for each of the 7514 patients, were used to assemble a matched cohort of 1620 (810 pairs) patients (mean age, 80 years; mean EF, 56%; 65% women; 10% black) receiving and not receiving CCBs, balanced on 114 baseline characteristics. The primary composite end point of all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization occurred in 82% and 81% of patients receiving and not receiving CCBs (hazard ratio for CCBs, 1.03; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-1.14). Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and all-cause hospitalization were 1.05 (0.94-1.18), 1.05 (0.91-1.21), and 1.03 (0.93-1.14), respectively. Similar associations were observed when we categorized patients into those receiving amlodipine and nonamlodipine CCBs. Among 7514 prematch patients, multivariable-adjusted and propensity-adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence interval) for primary composite end point were 1.03 (0.95-1.12) and 1.02 (0.94-1.11), respectively.In hospitalized older patients with heart failure, new discharge prescriptions for CCBs had no associations with composite or individual end points of mortality or heart failure hospitalization, regardless of the class of CCBs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses a study to determine if patients with stable coronary artery disease carrying the KIF6 719Arg allele are at an increased risk of future events and whether they obtain more benefit from high-dose statin therapy.The occurrence of major cardiovascular events (MCVE) was chosen as primary outcome measure. It concludes that carriers of the KIF6 719 Arg allele were not at increased cardiovascular risk and have no consistent cardiovascular benefit from high-dose statin therapy. INSET: CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE.

The article discusses research on the use of and trends in evidence-based care acute myocardial infarction (AMI) processes and outcome in Asian-American and White patients in the U.S. The study made use of data from the Get With the Fuidelines-Coronary Arter Disease (GWTG-CAD) program of the American Heart Association (AHA). It found that Asian-Americans were less likely to undergo smoking cessation counseling.

Implementation of prevention policies has often been impeded or delayed due to the lack of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with hard clinical outcomes (eg, incident disease, mortality). Despite the prominent role of RCTs in health care, it may not always be feasible to conduct RCTs of public health interventions with hard outcomes due to logistical and ethical considerations. RCTs may also lack external validity and have limited generalizability. Currently, there is insufficient guidance for policymakers charged with establishing evidence-based policy to determine whether an RCT with hard outcomes is needed before policy recommendations. In this context, the purpose of this article is to assess, in a case study, the feasibility of conducting an RCT of the oft-cited issue of sodium reduction on cardiovascular outcomes and then propose a framework for decision-making, which includes an assessment of the feasibility of conducting an RCT with hard clinical outcomes when such trials are unavailable. We designed and assessed the feasibility of potential individual- and cluster-randomized trials of sodium reduction on cardiovascular outcomes. Based on our assumptions, a trial using any of the designs considered would require tens of thousands of participants and cost hundreds of millions of dollars, which is prohibitively expensive. Our estimates may be conservative given several key challenges, such as the unknown costs of sustaining a long-term difference in sodium intake, the effect of differential cotreatment with antihypertensive medications, and long lag time to clinical outcomes. Thus, it would be extraordinarily difficult to conduct such a trial, and despite the high costs, would still be at substantial risk for a spuriously null result. A robust framework, such as the one we developed, should be used to guide policymakers when establishing evidence-based public health interventions in the absence of trials with hard clinical outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article comments on a study which provides some optimal targets of blood pressure (BP) in Diabetes Mellitus patients for controlling cardiovascular (CD) risks. The problems faced while conducting this study like heterogeneity of patient population and the presence of combroid conditions are given. It is given that in patient with preexisting CV disease, the BP should not go below 135mm Hg.

Understanding noncardiovascular comorbidities and geriatric syndromes in elderly patients with heart failure (HF) is important as the average age of the population increases. Healthcare professionals need to consider these complex dynamics when managing older adults with HF, especially those older than 80. A number of small studies have described associations between HF and major geriatric domains. With information on patients' cognitive, functional decline, and ability to adhere to therapy, physicians can plan for individualized treatment goals and recommendations for these patients., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The authors have no conflicts of interest to report., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: According to the 2004 Surgeon General's Report on Health Consequences of Smoking, after >15 years of abstinence, the cardiovascular risk of former smokers becomes similar to that of never-smokers. Whether this health benefit of smoking cessation varies by amount and duration of prior smoking remains unclear., Methods and Results: Of the 4482 adults ≥65 years without prevalent heart failure (HF) in the Cardiovascular Health Study, 2556 were never-smokers, 629 current smokers, and 1297 former smokers with >15 years of cessation, of whom 312 were heavy smokers (highest quartile; ≥32 pack-years). Age-sex-race-adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for centrally adjudicated incident HF and mortality during 13 years of follow-up were estimated using Cox regression models. Compared with never-smokers, former smokers as a group had similar risk for incident HF (aHR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.85-1.16) and all-cause mortality (aHR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.96-1.20), but former heavy smokers had higher risk for both HF (aHR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.15-1.83) and mortality (aHR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.17-1.64). However, when compared with current smokers, former heavy smokers had lower risk of death (aHR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53-0.77), but not of HF (aHR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.74-1.28)., Conclusions: After >15 years of smoking cessation, the risk of HF and death for most former smokers becomes similar to that of never-smokers. Although this benefit of smoking cessation is not extended to those with ≥32 pack-years of prior smoking, they have lower risk of death relative to current smokers., (© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Asian-Americans represent an important United States minority population, yet there are limited data regarding the clinical care and outcomes of Asian-Americans following acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Using data from the American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines-Coronary Artery Disease (GWTG-CAD) program, we compared use of and trends in evidence-based care AMI processes and outcome in Asian-American versus white patients., Methods and Results: We analyzed 107,403 AMI patients (4412 Asian-Americans, 4.1%) from 382 United States centers participating in the Get With The Guidelines-Coronary Artery Disease program between 2003 and 2008. Use of 6 AMI performance measures, composite "defect-free" care (proportion receiving all eligible performance measures), door-to-balloon time, and in-hospital mortality were examined. Trends in care over this time period were explored. Compared with whites, Asian-American AMI patients were significantly older, more likely to be covered by Medicaid and recruited in the west region, and had a higher prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, heart failure, and smoking. In-hospital unadjusted mortality was higher among Asian-American patients. Overall, Asian-Americans were comparable with whites regarding the baseline quality of care, except that Asian-Americans were less likely to get smoking cessation counseling (65.6% versus 81.5%). Asian-American AMI patients experienced improvement in the 6 individual measures (P≤0.048), defect-free care (P<0.001), and door-to-balloon time (P<0.001). The improvement rates were similar for both Asian-Americans and whites. Compared with whites, the adjusted in-hospital mortality rate was higher for Asian-Americans (adjusted relative risk: 1.16; 95% confidence interval: 1.00-1.35; P=0.04)., Conclusions: Evidence-based care for AMI processes improved significantly over the period of 2003 to 2008 for Asian-American and white patients in the Get With The Guidelines-Coronary Artery Disease program. Differences in care between Asian-Americans and whites, when present, were reduced over time.

Systolic dysfunction and heart failure are major public health problems associated with a significant risk of morbidity and mortality. During the past 2 decades, considerable progress has been made in defining the underlying pathophysiology and the appropriate therapies in heart failure. In patients with chronic heart failure (CHF), sustained sympathetic overactivation leads to down-regulation of beta receptors and uncoupling of the receptors from adenylate cyclase. The clear understanding of the pivotal role of sympathetic overactivation in CHF has led to the evaluation of beta- blocker therapy in CHF. A number of large randomized clinical trials have been conducted with a variety of beta-blockers, and although most of them have shown benefit, there have been differing findings with different molecules. beta-blockers are now considered part of the standard therapy for all patients with symptomatic CHF. Despite the strong evidence supporting their use, beta-blockers continue to be underutilized in CHF.

Hyperglycemia is common and associated with markedly increased mortality rates in patients hospitalized with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Despite the fact that several studies have documented this association, hyperglycemia remains underappreciated as a risk factor, and it is frequently untreated in ACS patients. This is in large part due to limitations of prior studies, and the remaining critical gaps in our understanding of the relationship between hyperglycemia and poor outcomes. The main objective of the present statement is to summarize the current state of knowledge regarding the association between elevated glucose and patient outcomes in ACS and to outline the most important knowledge gaps in this field. These gaps include the need to specifically define hyperglycemia, develop optimal ways of measuring and tracking glucose values during ACS hospitalization, and better understand the physiological mechanisms responsible for poor outcomes associated with hyperglycemia. The most important issue, however, is whether elevated glucose is a direct mediator of adverse outcomes in ACS patients or just a marker of greater disease severity. Given the marked increase in short- and long-term mortality associated with hyperglycemia, there is an urgent need for definitive large randomized trials to determine whether treatment strategies aimed at glucose control will improve patient outcomes and to define specific glucose treatment targets. Although firm guidelines will need to await completion of these clinical trials, the present statement also provides consensus recommendations for hyperglycemia management in patients with ACS on the basis of the available data.

Background: Low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol is the principal target of lipid-lowering therapy, but recent evidence has suggested more appropriate targets. We compared the relationships of on-treatment levels of LDL cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B, as well as ratios of total/HDL cholesterol, LDL/HDL cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B/A-I, with the occurrence of cardiovascular events in patients receiving statin therapy., Methods and Results: A post hoc analysis was performed that combined data from 2 prospective, randomized clinical trials in which 10,001 ("Treating to New Targets") and 8888 ("Incremental Decrease in End Points through Aggressive Lipid Lowering") patients with established coronary heart disease were assigned to usual-dose or high-dose statin treatment. In models with LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B were positively associated with cardiovascular outcome, whereas a positive relationship with LDL cholesterol was lost. In a model that contained non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B, neither was significant owing to collinearity. Total/HDL cholesterol ratio and the apolipoprotein B/A-I ratio in particular were each more closely associated with outcome than any of the individual proatherogenic lipoprotein parameters., Conclusions: In patients receiving statin therapy, on-treatment levels of non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B were more closely associated with cardiovascular outcome than levels of LDL cholesterol. Inclusion of measurements of the antiatherogenic lipoprotein fraction further strengthened the relationships. These data support the use of non-HDL cholesterol or apolipoprotein B as novel treatment targets for statin therapy. Given the absence of interventions that have been proven to consistently reduce cardiovascular disease risk through raising plasma levels of HDL cholesterol or apolipoprotein A-I, it seems premature to consider the ratio variables as clinically useful.

Background and Purpose: Warfarin prevents stroke in atrial fibrillation (AF); however, concerns regarding international normalized ratio control and hemorrhage limit its use in the elderly. The oral direct thrombin inhibitors (DTIs) are potential alternatives to warfarin, offering fixed dosing without drug and dietary interactions and the need for international normalized ratio monitoring. Although ximelagatran, a DTI studied in the Stroke Prevention using an ORal Thrombin Inhibitor in atrial Fibrillation trials, has been withdrawn, development of other DTIs continues. We report our experience in elderly high-risk AF patients on ximelagatran compared with warfarin therapy., Methods: Data from patients with AF and stroke risk factors randomized in Stroke Prevention using an ORal Thrombin Inhibitor in atrial Fibrillation III and V trials to ximelagatran or warfarin were analyzed for stroke/systemic emboli, bleeding, and raised alanine aminotransferase levels in those >or=75 (n=2804) and <75 (n=4525) years., Results: Ximelagatran was as effective as warfarin in reducing stroke/systemic emboli in the elderly (2.23%/y with ximelagatran vs 2.27%/y with warfarin) as in younger patients (1.25%/y vs 1.28%/y). Total bleeds were significantly lower with ximelagatran compared with warfarin in elderly (40% vs 45%, P=0.01) and younger (27% vs 35%, P<0.001) patients. Raised alanine aminotransferase values (>3-fold elevation) among ximelagatran patients were more common in older (7.5% old vs 5.3% young) patients, particularly women (9.5% elderly women vs 6.1% elderly men)., Conclusions: In high-risk elderly AF patients, ximelagatran is as effective as warfarin with less bleeding, but alanine aminotransferase elevations are common, particularly in elderly women. Oral DTIs for stroke prevention show promise in elderly patients.

Background: Identification of heart failure outpatients at increased risk for clinical deterioration remains a critical challenge, with few tools currently available to assist clinicians. We tested whether serial health status assessments with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) can identify patients at increased risk for mortality and hospitalization., Methods and Results: We evaluated 1358 patients with heart failure after an acute myocardial infarction in the Eplerenone's Neurohormonal Efficacy and Survival Study, a multicenter randomized trial that included serial KCCQ assessments. Cox proportional-hazards models were used to examine whether changes in KCCQ scores during successive outpatient visits were independently associated with all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality or hospitalization. Change in KCCQ (deltaKCCQ) was linearly associated with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], for each 5-point decrease in deltaKCCQ, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.19) and the combined outcome of cardiovascular mortality or hospitalization (HR for each 5-point decrease in deltaKCCQ, 1.12; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.18). In Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, all-cause mortality among patients with deltaKCCQ of < or = -10, > -10 to < 10, and > 10 points was 26%, 16%, and 13%, respectively (P=0.008). After multivariable adjustment, the linear relationship between deltaKCCQ and both all-cause mortality and combined cardiovascular death and hospitalization persisted (HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.18; and HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.05 to 1.17 for each 5-point decrease in deltaKCCQ, respectively)., Conclusions: In heart failure outpatients, serial health status assessments with the KCCQ can identify high-risk patients and may prove useful in directing the frequency of follow-up and the intensity of treatment.

Background: Statins reduce the rate of major cardiovascular events in high-risk patients, but their potential benefit as treatment for heart failure (HF) is less clear., Methods and Results: Patients (n=10,001) with stable coronary disease were randomized to treatment with atorvastatin 80 or 10 mg/d and followed up for a median of 4.9 years. A history of HF was present in 7.8% of patients. A known ejection fraction <30% and advanced HF were exclusion criteria for the study. A predefined secondary end point of the study was hospitalization for HF. The incidence of hospitalization for HF was 2.4% in the 80-mg arm and 3.3% in the 10-mg arm (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 0.94; P=0.0116). The treatment effect of the higher dose was more marked in patients with a history of HF: 17.3% versus 10.6% in the 10- and 80-mg arms, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.4 to 0.88; P=0.009). Among patients without a history of HF, the rates of hospitalization for HF were much lower: 1.8% in the 80-mg group and 2.0% in the 10-mg group (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.64 to 1.16; P=0.34). Only one third of patients hospitalized for HF had evidence of preceding angina or myocardial infarction during the study period. Blood pressure was almost identical during follow-up in the treatment groups., Conclusions: Compared with a lower dose, intensive treatment with atorvastatin in patients with stable coronary disease significantly reduces hospitalizations for HF. In a post hoc analysis, this benefit was observed only in patients with a history of HF. The mechanism accounting for this benefit is unlikely to be due primarily to a reduction in interim coronary events or differences in blood pressure.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the antianginal and antiischemic efficacy, safety, and the potential for tolerance or withdrawal effects of amlodipine. BACKGROUND: The slow onset of action and long half-life of amlodipine may help avoid withdrawal effects such as the exacerbation of angina and precipitation of myocardial seen with beta-blockers. METHODS: After a 2-week single-blind placebo run-in period, 226 patients with stable exertional angina pectoris were given amlodipine (starting at 5 mg day(minus sign1) and titrated to 10 mg day(minus sign1)) in a single-blind fashion for 8 weeks. One hundred seventy-two responders (greater-than-or-equal7% improvement in symptom-limited exercise time) entered a 4-week double-blind withdrawal phase and randomly received continued treatment with amlodipine (n = 91) or placebo (n = 81). RESULTS: Treatment with amlodipine increased the exercise capacity by 14% and improved time to angina onset by 25% and time to 1-mm ST segment deviation by 18%. These variables remained essentially unchanged at the end of the 4-week withdrawal phase for the group continued on amlodipine (+0.8%, +3.2%, and +2.0%, respectively) but decreased for the group on placebo (minus sign5.8%, minus sign9.8%, and minus sign11.0%, respectively) (p < 0.001 between groups, all assessments) to values similar to those obtained during the initial placebo run-in period. Approximately one-third of the patients responded to 5 mg amlodipine during single-blind therapy and according to "usual clinical practice" remained on this dose. The results of randomized withdrawal in the subgroup receiving 5 mg also favored amlodipine over placebo. Side effects were reported by 47% of patients on amlodipine and by 22% of patients receiving placebo. The most frequently reported side effects for