Risk factors in cardiovascular patients: Challenges and opportunities to improve secondary prevention

BACKGROUND Effective management of major cardiovascular risk factors is of great importance to reduce mortality from cardiovascular disease (CVD). The Survey of Risk Factors in Coronary Heart Disease (SURF CHD) II study is a clinical audit of the recording and management of CHD risk factors. It was developed in collaboration with the European Association of Preventive Cardiology and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Previous studies have shown that control of major cardiovascular risk factors in patients with established atherosclerotic CVD is generally inadequate. Azerbaijan is a country in the South Caucasus, a region at a very high risk for CVD. AIM To assess adherence to ESC recommendations for secondary prevention of CVD based on the measurement of both modifiable major risk factors and their therapeutic management in patients with confirmed CHD at different hospitals in Baku (Azerbaijan). METHODS Six tertiary health care centers participated in the SURF CHD II study between 2019 and 2021. Information on demographics, risk factors, physical and laboratory data, and medications was collected using a standard questionnaire in consecutive patients aged ≥ 18 years with established CHD during outpatient visits. Data from 687 patients (mean age 59.6 ± 9.58 years; 24.9% female) were included in the study. RESULTS Only 15.1% of participants were involved in cardiac rehabilitation programs. The rate of uncontrolled risk factors was high: Systolic blood pressure (BP) (SBP) (54.6%), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (86.8%), diabetes mellitus (DM) (60.6%), as well as overweight (66.6%) and obesity (25%). In addition, significant differences in the prevalence and control of some risk factors [smoking, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, blood glucose (BG), and SBP] between female and male participants were found. The cardiovascular health index score (CHIS) was calculated from the six risk factors: Non- or ex-smoker, BMI < 25 kg/m2, moderate/vigorous physical activity, controlled BP (< 140/90 mmHg; 140/80 mmHg for patients with DM), controlled LDL-C (< 70 mg/dL), and controlled BG (glycohemoglobin < 7% or BG < 126 mg/dL). Good, intermediate, and poor categories of CHIS were identified in 6%, 58.3%, and 35.7% of patients, respectively (without statistical differences between female and male patients). CONCLUSION Implementation of the current ESC recommendations for CHD secondary prevention and, in particular, the control rate of BP, are insufficient. Given the fact that patients with different comorbid pathologies are at a very high risk, this is of great importance in the management of such patients. This should be taken into account by healthcare organizers when planning secondary prevention activities and public health protection measures, especially in the regions at a high risk for CVD. A wide range of educational products based on the Clinical Practice Guidelines should be used to improve the adherence of healthcare professionals and patients to the management of CVD risk factors

Akut koroner sendromlu diyabetik hastalarda aort-koroner bypass cerrahisi ile yeni nesil ilaç salınımlı stentlerle uygulanan perkütan koroner girişimin erken ve uzun dönem sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması

Purpose: The aim of this study was to determine the difference between patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (with new generation drug-eluting stents) who had diabetes mellitus during the course of an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Materials and Methods: We carried out a retrospective evaluation of 405 diabetic patients admitted with an ACS during the period of 2 years in a single-center. Patients were followed for 5 years. All clinical incidents, such as death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, and stent thrombosis were recorded Results: We examined 405 patients with diabetes out of 1643 patients with ACS. of these, 183 (45.1%) were included in the PCI group and 222 (54.8%) were in the CABG group. During 5-years follow-up, primary endpoints including death, MI, and stroke were observed in 31 patients (16.9%) in the PCI group and in 33 patients (14.9%) in the CABG group. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of primary endpoints. All-cause mortality during 5-years was observed in 17 patients (9.8%) in the PCI, 20 (9.1%) in the CABG group. Conclusion: There was no difference in all-cause mortality between the PCI and the CABG groups during 5-year follow-up. Repeated revascularization and myocardial infarction were higher in the PCI group and the stroke rates were higher in the CABG group