Search

Objectives: The aim of this work was to evaluate the prognostic impact of statin therapy in symptomatic patients without obstructive CAD., Background: Information on the prognostic impact of post-coronary computed tomographic angiography (CTA) statin use in patients with no or nonobstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) is sparse., Methods: Patients undergoing CTA with suspected CAD in western Denmark from 2008 to 2017 with <50% coronary stenoses were identified. Information on post-CTA use of statin therapy and cardiovascular events were obtained from national registries., Results: The study included 33,552 patients, median aged 56 years, 58% female, with no (n = 19,669) or nonobstructive (n = 13,883) CAD and a median follow-up of 3.5 years. The absolute risk of the combined end point of myocardial infarction (MI) or all-cause mortality was directly associated with the CAD burden with an event rate/1,000 patient-years of 4.13 (95% CI: 3.69-4.61) in no, 7.74 (95% CI: 6.88-8.71) in mild (coronary artery calcium score [CACS] 0-99), 13.72 (95% CI: 11.61-16.23) in moderate (CACS 100-399), and 32.47 (95% CI: 26.25-40.16) in severe (CACS ≥400) nonobstructive CAD. Statin therapy was associated with a multivariable adjusted HR for MI and death of 0.52 (95% CI: 0.36-0.75) in no, 0.44 (95% CI: 0.32-0.62) in mild, 0.51 (95% CI: 0.34-0.75) in moderate, and 0.52 (95% CI: 0.32-0.86) in severe nonobstructive CAD. The estimated numbers needed to treat to prevent the primary end point were 92 (95% CI: 61-182) in no, 36 (95% CI: 26-58) in mild, 24 (95% CI: 15-61) in moderate, and 13 (95% CI: 7-86) in severe nonobstructive CAD. Residual confounding may persist, but not to an extent explaining all of the observed risk reduction associated with statin treatment., Conclusions: The risk of MI and all-cause mortality in patients without obstructive CAD is directly associated with the CAD burden. Statin therapy is associated with a reduction of MI and all-cause death across the spectrum of CAD, however, the absolute benefit of treatment is directionally proportional with the CAD burden., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This work was supported by a research grant to Dr Øvrehus by the Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark. Dr Grove has received speaker honoraria or consultancy fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer, Merck Sharp & Dohme, MundiPharma, Portola Pharmaceuticals, and Roche; and an unrestricted research grant from Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Nørgaard has received unrestricted institutional research grants from Siemens and Heart Flow. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To determine the detection rate (sensitivity) of the high-risk strategy recommended in the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE/UK) and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines on cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. In particular, to evaluate the ability to ensure statin therapy to contemporary Europeans destined for a first myocardial infarction (MI)., Design: 393 consecutive statin-naïve, CVD-free patients without diabetes hospitalised for a first MI, 247 of whom were 40-75 years of age. We assumed they had undergone a health check the day before their MI and estimated the predicted risk., Primary Outcome: Sensitivity of the risk-based eligibility for primary prevention with statins recommended by the guidelines., Results: All recommended risk scores rank-ordered patients similarly, but the sensitivity of the cut point above which statin therapy should be considered differed substantially. In younger patients (age 40-60), 62% of men and 13% of women qualified for statin therapy by ACC/AHA criteria, compared with only 2% of men and no women using the ESC criteria recommended for most non-Eastern European countries. In those 60-75 years of age, the ACC/AHA guidelines captured all men and 85% of women, compared with 12% and 2%, respectively, using the new ESC guideline. This guideline restricted the eligibility for primary prevention with statins substantially by reclassifying many European countries from 'high-risk' to 'low-risk', whereas the eligibility was expanded in the ACC/AHA and the new NICE/UK guidelines by lowering the decision threshold., Conclusions: The 2012 ESC guidelines differ substantially from the 2013 ACC/AHA and 2014 NICE/UK guidelines in ability to secure statin therapy to those destined for a first MI. A great opportunity for primary prevention with statins remains unexploited in Europe., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Introduction: Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD), including acute myocardial infarction (AMI), is caused by well-known risk factors. They constitute important therapeutic targets, but their predictive value is disputed. We evaluated the effectiveness of the risk scoring system (SCORE) and thresholds for pharmacotherapy re-commended in the European guidelines on CVD prevention., Material and Methods: The medical records of 605 consecutive patients hospitalized for a first AMI were reviewed. Patients with pre-existing CVD, diabetes, or incomplete information on risk factors were excluded. Those not treated with statin before AMI were risk stratified based on risk factors. A SCORE ≥ 5% or ≥ 10% was considered to qualify for preventive medication in young adults (age ≤ 60 years) or elderly (age > 60 years), respectively., Results: Before AMI, 40 (9%) used statin. Among non-statin users, only five of the 109 young adults had a SCORE ≥ 5%, and 23 of the 284 elderly had a SCORE ≥ 10%. Among women, only three elderly qualified for treatment. More than four times more patients would have qualified for treatment with the high-risk country chart used in 2011. The incremental value of the novel high-density lipoprotein adjusted SCORE charts was limited., Conclusion: Few patients admitted with a first AMI used statin. Among non-statin users, SCORE and the recommended thresholds for pharmacotherapy identified no women and less than one out of ten men who untreated were destined for an AMI before 61 years of age. The preventive potential of a traditional risk factor-based health check is limited., Funding: not relevant., Trial Registration: not relevant.

Said differently, LDL cholesterol cannot be too low after a myocardial infarction and all patients with a myocardial infarction should receive LDL cholesterol-lowering medication post myocardial infarction irrespective of their LDL cholesterol levels at the time of the infarct. Just as age - these comorbidities increase the risk of dying during follow-up for patients with low LDL cholesterol at myocardial infarction compared with those with high LDL cholesterol at myocardial infarction. Elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol is a causal risk factor for the development of atherosclerosis and drives an increased risk of both myocardial infarction and early death. [Extracted from the article]

Aims  This study sought to investigate outcomes following a normal CT-derived fractional flow reserve (FFRCT) result in patients with moderate stenosis and coronary artery calcification, and to describe the relationship between the extent of calcification, stenosis, and FFRCT. Methods and results Data from 975 consecutive patients suspected of chronic coronary syndrome with stenosis (30–70%) determined by computed CT angiography and FFRCT to guide downstream management decisions were reviewed. Median (range) follow-up time was 2.2 (0.5–4.2) years. Coronary artery calcium (CAC) scores were ≥400 in 25%, stenosis ≥50% in 83%, and FFRCT >0.80 in 51% of the patients. There was a lower incidence of the composite endpoint (death, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, and unplanned coronary revascularization) at 4.2 years in patients with any CAC and FFRCT > 0.80 vs. FFRCT ≤ 0.80 (3.9% and 8.7%, P  = 0.04), however, in patients with CAC scores ≥400 the risk difference between groups did not reach statistical significance, 4.2% vs. 9.7% (P  = 0.24). A negative relationship between CAC scores and FFRCT irrespective of stenosis severity was demonstrated. Conclusion FFRCT shows promise in identifying patients with stenosis and calcification who can be managed without further downstream testing. Moreover, an inverse relationship between CAC levels and FFRCT was demonstrated. Studies are needed to further assess the clinical utility of FFRCT in patients with extensive coronary calcification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]