Search

Objectives: We aimed to evaluate cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) compared with healthy controls (HC) and to assess its association with disease-specific features., Methods: Ninety IIM patients and 180 age-/sex-matched HC were included. Subjects with a history of CV disease (angina pectoris, myocardial infarction and cerebrovascular/peripheral arterial vascular events) were excluded. All participants were prospectively recruited and underwent examinations of carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT), pulse wave velocity (PWV), ankle-brachial index (ABI), and body composition. The risk of fatal CV events was evaluated by the Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) and its modifications., Results: Compared with HC, IIM patients had a significantly higher prevalence of traditional CV risk factors, carotid artery disease (CARD), abnormal ABI and PWV. After propensity score matching (using traditional CV risk factors), the prevalence of CARD and pathological PWV remained significantly higher in IIM than HC. No significant difference in SCORE was observed. The most unfavourable CV risk profile was observed in patients with necrotizing myopathy, especially in statin-induced anti-HMGCR+ patients. The calculated CV risk scores by SCORE, SCORE2 and SCORE multiplied by the coefficient 1.5 (mSCORE) were reclassified according to CIMT and the presence of carotid plaques. SCORE was demonstrated to be most inaccurate in predicting CV risk in IIM. Age, disease activity, lipid profile, body composition parameters and blood pressure were the most significant predictors of CV risk in IIM patients., Conclusion: Significantly higher prevalence of traditional risk factors and subclinical atherosclerosis was observed in IIM patients compared with HC., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Rheumatology.)

Aims: To assess differences in estimated cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk among rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients from different world regions and to evaluate the management and goal attainment of lipids and blood pressure (BP)., Methods and Results: The survey of CVD risk factors in patients with RA was conducted in 14 503 patients from 19 countries during 2014-19. The treatment goal for BP was <140/90 mmHg. CVD risk prediction and lipid goals were according to the 2016 European guidelines. Overall, 21% had a very high estimated risk of CVD, ranging from 5% in Mexico, 15% in Asia, 19% in Northern Europe, to 31% in Central and Eastern Europe and 30% in North America. Of the 52% with indication for lipid-lowering treatment (LLT), 44% were using LLT. The lipid goal attainment was 45% and 18% in the high and very high risk groups, respectively. Use of statins in monotherapy was 24%, while 1% used statins in combination with other LLT. Sixty-two per cent had hypertension and approximately half of these patients were at BP goal. The majority of the patients used antihypertensive treatment in monotherapy (24%), while 10% and 5% as a two- or three-drug combination., Conclusion: We revealed considerable geographical differences in estimated CVD risk and preventive treatment. Low goal attainment for LLT was observed, and only half the patients obtained BP goal. Despite a high focus on the increased CVD risk in RA patients over the last decade, there is still substantial potential for improvement in CVD preventive measures., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Aims: To provide contemporary data on the implementation of European guideline recommendations for lipid-lowering therapies (LLTs) across different settings and populations and how this impacts low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goal achievement., Methods and Results: An 18 country, cross-sectional, observational study of patients prescribed LLT for primary or secondary prevention in primary or secondary care across Europe. Between June 2017 and November 2018, data were collected at a single visit, including LLT in the preceding 12 months and most recent LDL-C. Primary outcome was the achievement of risk-based 2016 European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) LDL-C goal while receiving stabilized LLT; 2019 goal achievement was also assessed. Overall, 5888 patients (3000 primary and 2888 secondary prevention patients) were enrolled; 54% [95% confidence interval (CI) 52-56] achieved their risk-based 2016 goal and 33% (95% CI 32-35) achieved their risk-based 2019 goal. High-intensity statin monotherapy was used in 20% and 38% of very high-risk primary and secondary prevention patients, respectively. Corresponding 2016 goal attainment was 22% and 45% (17% and 22% for 2019 goals) for very high-risk primary and secondary prevention patients, respectively. Use of moderate-high-intensity statins in combination with ezetimibe (9%), or any LLT with PCSK9 inhibitors (1%), was low; corresponding 2016 and 2019 goal attainment was 53% and 20% (ezetimibe combination), and 67% and 58% (PCSK9i combination)., Conclusion: Gaps between clinical guidelines and clinical practice for lipid management across Europe persist, which will be exacerbated by the 2019 guidelines. Even with optimized statins, greater utilization of non-statin LLT is likely needed to reduce these gaps for patients at highest risk., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

A panel of European experts on lipids and cardiovascular disease discussed clinical approaches to managing cardiovascular risk in clinical practice, including residual cardiovascular risk associated with lipid abnormalities, such as atherogenic dyslipidaemia (AD). A simplified definition of AD was proposed to enhance understanding of this condition, its prevalence, and its impact on cardiovascular risk. Atherogenic dyslipidaemia can be defined by high fasting triglyceride levels (≥2.3 mmol/L) and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c) levels (≤1.0 and ≤1.3 mmol/L in men and women, respectively) in statin-treated patients at high cardiovascular risk. The use of a single marker for the diagnosis and treatment of AD, such as non-HDL-c, was advocated. Interventions including lifestyle optimization and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-lowering therapy with statins (±ezetimibe) are implemented by all experts. Treatment of residual AD can be performed with the addition of fenofibrate, since it can improve the complete lipoprotein profile and reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with AD. Specific clinical scenarios in which fenofibrate may be prescribed are discussed, and include patients with very high triglycerides (≥5.6 mmol/L), patients who are intolerant or resistant to statins, and patients with AD and at high cardiovascular risk. The fenofibrate-statin combination was considered by the experts to benefit from a favourable benefit-risk profile. Cardiovascular experts adopt a multifaceted approach to the prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, with lifestyle optimization, LDL-lowering therapy, and treatment of AD with fenofibrate routinely used to help reduce a patient's overall cardiovascular risk.