| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Kotseva, K, et al.
(författare)
-
Lifestyle and impact on cardiovascular risk factor control in coronary patients across 27 countries: Results from the European Society of Cardiology ESC-EORP EUROASPIRE V registry
- 2019
-
Ingår i: European journal of preventive cardiology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 2047-4881 .- 2047-4873. ; 26:8, s. 824-835
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The aim of this study was to determine whether the Joint European Societies guidelines on secondary cardiovascular prevention are followed in everyday practice. Design A cross-sectional ESC-EORP survey (EUROASPIRE V) at 131 centres in 81 regions in 27 countries. Methods Patients (<80 years old) with verified coronary artery events or interventions were interviewed and examined ≥6 months later. Results A total of 8261 patients (females 26%) were interviewed. Nineteen per cent smoked and 55% of them were persistent smokers, 38% were obese (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2), 59% were centrally obese (waist circumference: men ≥102 cm; women ≥88 cm) while 66% were physically active <30 min 5 times/week. Forty-two per cent had a blood pressure ≥140/90 mmHg (≥140/85 if diabetic), 71% had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥1.8 mmol/L (≥70 mg/dL) and 29% reported having diabetes. Cardioprotective medication was: anti-platelets 93%, beta-blockers 81%, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers 75% and statins 80%. Conclusion A large majority of coronary patients have unhealthy lifestyles in terms of smoking, diet and sedentary behaviour, which adversely impacts major cardiovascular risk factors. A majority did not achieve their blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and glucose targets. Cardiovascular prevention requires modern preventive cardiology programmes delivered by interdisciplinary teams of healthcare professionals addressing all aspects of lifestyle and risk factor management, in order to reduce the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Kubica, Jacek, et al.
(författare)
-
Prolonged antithrombotic therapy in patients after acute coronary syndrome : A critical appraisal of current European Society of Cardiology guidelines
- 2020
-
Ingår i: CARDIOLOGY JOURNAL. - : VM Media SP. zo.o VM Group SK. - 1897-5593 .- 1898-018X. ; 27:6, s. 661-676
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The increased risk of non-cardiovascular death in patients receiving clopidogrel or prasugrel in comparison with the placebo group in the Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) trial in contrast to the decreased risk of cardiovascular death and all-cause death seen in patients treated with low-dose ticagrelor in the EU label population of the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 trial, resulted in inclusion in the 2020 ESC NSTE-ACS guidelines the recommendation for use of clopidogrel or prasugrel only if the patient is not eligible for treatment with ticagrelor. The prevalence of the primary outcome composed of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction was lower in the low-dose rivaroxaban and acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) group than in the ASA-alone group in the COMPASS trial. Moreover, all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality rates were lower in the rivaroxaban-plus-ASA group. Comparison of the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 and COMPASS trial patient characteristics clearly shows that each of these treatment strategies should be addressed at different groups of patients. A greater benefit in post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with a high risk of ischemic events and without high bleeding risk may be expected with ASA and ticagrelor 60 mg b.i.d. when the therapy is continued without interruption or with short interruption only after ACS. On the other hand, ASA and rivaroxaban 2.5 mg b.i.d. seems to be a better option when indications for dual antithrombotic therapy (DATT) appear after a longer time from ACS (more than 2 years) and/or from cessation of DAPT (more than 1 year) and in patients with multiple vascular bed atherosclerosis. Thus, both options of DATTs complement each other rather than compete, as can be presumed from the recommendations. However, a direct comparison between these strategies should be tested in future clinical trials.
|
|
