The influence of partners on successful lifestyle modification in patients with coronary artery disease

Background: Marital status is associated with prognosis in patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, the influence of partners on successful modification of lifestyle-related risk factors (LRFs) in secondary CVD prevention is unclear. Therefore, we studied the association between the presence of a partner, partner participation in lifestyle interventions and LRF modification in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: In a secondary analysis of the RESPONSE-2 trial (n = 711), which compared nurse-coordinated referral to community-based lifestyle programs (smoking cessation, weight reduction and/or physical activity) to usual care in patients with CAD, we investigated the association between the presence of a partner and the level of partner participation on improvement in >1 LRF (urinary cotinine <200 ng/l, ≥5% weight reduction, ≥10% increased 6-min walking distance) without deterioration in other LRFs at 12 months follow-up. Results: The proportion of patients with a partner was 80% (571/711); 19% women (108/571). In the intervention group, 48% (141/293) had a participating partner in ≥1 lifestyle program. Overall, the presence of a partner was associated with patients' successful LRF modification (adjusted risk ratio (aRR) 1.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.40-2.51). A participating partner was associated with successful weight reduction (aRR 1.73, 95% CI 1.15-2.35). Conclusion: The presence of a partner is associated with LRF improvement in patients with CAD. Moreover, patients with partners participating in lifestyle programs are more successful in reducing weight. Involving partners of CAD patients in weight reduction interventions should be considered in routine practice. Keywords: (Mesh): Secondary prevention; Coronary artery disease; Risk reduction behaviour; Social support; Spouses

Patients' preferences for secondary prevention following a coronary event

Objective:Despite clear evidence on the effectiveness of secondary prevention, patients with coronary artery disease frequently fail to reach guideline-based risk factor targets. Integrating patients’ preferences into treatment decisions has been recommended to reduce this gap. However, this requires knowledge about patient treatment preferences. Therefore, through a survey study, we aimed to explore which risk factors patients self-perceived, prioritised for improvement, and needed support with after a recent hospitalisation for coronary heart disease. Methods: A digital questionnaire was presented to patients &gt; 18 years recently discharged (≤3 months) from an acute coronary care unit in the Netherlands (Europe). Patients could select from eight cardiovascular risk factors that they (1) self-perceived, (2) prioritised for improvement, and (3) needed support to improve. Patients’ perceived risk factors were compared to those documented in the medical records. Results: Respondents (N = 254, 26 % women), mean age 64 (SD 10) years, identified ‘physical inactivity’ more frequently than their medical records (140 patients vs. 91 records, p &lt; 0.001), while three other risk factors were reported with equal and four with lower frequency. ‘Physical inactivity’, ‘overweight’ and ‘stress’ were most frequently prioritised for improvement (82 %, 88 % and 78 %) and professional support (64 %, 50 % and 58 %), with 87 % preferring lifestyle optimisation if this would reduce drug use. Conclusions: Patients with a recent coronary event show significant disparities in identifying risk factors compared to their medical records. They tend to prefer improving lifestyle- over drug-modifiable risk factors, particularly physical inactivity, overweight and stress, and indicate the need for support in improving these factors.</p

The hemodynamic cardiac profiler volume-time curves and related parameters: an MRI validation study

Background. The hemodynamic cardiac profiler (HCP) is a new, non-invasive, operator-independent screening tool that uses six independent electrode pairs on the frontal thoracic skin, and a low-intensity, patient-safe, high-frequency applied alternating current to measure ventricular volume dynamics during the cardiac cycle for producing ventricular volume-time curves (VTCs). Objective. To validate VTCs from HCP against VTCs from MRI in healthy volunteers. Approach. Left- and right-ventricular VTCs were obtained by HCP and MRI in six healthy participants in supine position. Since HCP is not compatible with MRI, HCP measurements were performed within 20 min before and immediately after MRI, without intermittent fluid intake or release by participants. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to validate HCP-VTC against MRI-VTC and to assess repeatability of HCP measurements before and after MRI. Bland-Altman plots were used to assess agreement between relevant HCP- and MRI-VTC-derived parameters. Precision of HCP’s measurement of VTC-derived parameters was determined for each study participant by calculating the coefficients of variation and repeatability coefficients. Main results. Left- and right-ventricular VTC ICCs between HCP and MRI were >0.8 for all study participants, indicating excellent agreement between HCP-VTCs and MRI-VTCs. Mean (range) ICC of HCP right-ventricular VTC versus MRI right-ventricular VTC was 0.94 (0.88-0.99) and seemed to be slightly higher than the mean ICC of HCP left-ventricular VTC versus MRI-VTC (0.91 (0.80-0.96)). The repeatability coefficient for HCP’s measurement of systolic time (tSys) was 45.0 ms at a mean value of 282.9 ± 26.3 ms. Repeatability of biventricular HCP-VTCs was excellent (ICC 0.96 (0.907-0.995)). Significance. Ventricular volume dynamics measured by HCP-VTCs show excellent agreement with VTCs measured by MRI. Since abnormal tSys is a sign of numerous cardiac diseases, the HCP may potentially be used as a diagnostic screening tool

Long-term cardiac follow-up of athletes infected with SARS-CoV-2 after resumption of elite-level sports

OBJECTIVE: Longitudinal consequences and potential interactions of COVID-19 and elite-level sports and exercise are unclear. Therefore, we determined the long-term detrimental cardiac effects of the interaction between SARS-CoV-2 infection and the highest level of sports and exercise.METHODS: This prospective controlled study included elite athletes from the Evaluation of Lifetime participation in Intensive Top-level sports and Exercise cohort. Athletes infected with SARS-CoV-2were offered structured, additional cardiovascular screenings, including cardiovascular MRI (CMR). We compared ventricular volumes and function, late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) and T1 relaxation times, between infected and non-infected elite athletes, and collected follow-up data on cardiac adverse events, ventricular arrhythmia burden and the cessation of sports careers.RESULTS: We included 259 elite athletes (mean age 26±5 years; 40% women), of whom 123 were infected (9% cardiovascular symptoms) and 136 were controls. We found no differences in function and volumetric CMR parameters. Four infected athletes (3%) demonstrated LGE (one reversible), compared with none of the controls. During the 26.7 (±5.8) months follow-up, all four athletes resumed elite-level sports, without an increase in ventricular arrhythmias or adverse cardiac remodelling. None of the infected athletes reported new cardiac symptoms or events. The majority (n=118; 96%) still participated in elite-level sports; no sports careers were terminated due to SARS-CoV-2.CONCLUSIONS: This prospective study demonstrates the safety of resuming elite-level sports after SARS-CoV-2 infection. The medium-term risks associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection and elite-level sports appear low, as the resumption of elite sports did not lead to detrimental cardiac effects or increases in clinical events, even in the four elite athletes with SARS-CoV-2 associated myocardial involvement.</p

Validation of Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2) and SCORE2-Older Persons in the EPIC-Norfolk prospective population cohort

Aims: The European Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2) and SCORE2-Older Persons (OP) models are recommended to identify individuals at high 10-year risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Independent validation and assessment of clinical utility is needed. This study aims to assess discrimination, calibration, and clinical utility of low-risk SCORE2 and SCORE2-OP. Methods and results: Validation in individuals aged 40-69 years (SCORE2) and 70-79 years (SCORE2-OP) without baseline CVD or diabetes from the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer (EPIC) Norfolk prospective population study. We compared 10-year CVD risk estimates with observed outcomes (cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and stroke). For SCORE2, 19 560 individuals (57% women) had 10-year CVD risk estimates of 3.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 3.6-3.7] vs. observed 3.8% (95% CI 3.6-4.1) [observed (O)/expected (E) ratio 1.0 (95% CI 1.0-1.1)]. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.75 (95% CI 0.74-0.77), with underestimation of risk in men [O/E 1.4 (95% CI 1.3-1.6)] and overestimation in women [O/E 0.7 (95% CI 0.6-0.8)]. Decision curve analysis (DCA) showed clinical benefit. Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2-Older Persons in 3113 individuals (58% women) predicted 10-year CVD events in 10.2% (95% CI 10.1-10.3) vs. observed 15.3% (95% CI 14.0-16.5) [O/E ratio 1.6 (95% CI 1.5-1.7)]. The AUC was 0.63 (95% CI 0.60-0.65) with underestimation of risk across sex and risk ranges. Decision curve analysis showed limited clinical benefit. Conclusion: In a UK population cohort, the SCORE2 low-risk model showed fair discrimination and calibration, with clinical benefit for preventive treatment initiation decisions. In contrast, in individuals aged 70-79 years, SCORE2-OP demonstrated poor discrimination, underestimated risk in both sexes, and limited clinical utility

Return to sports after COVID-19: a position paper from the Dutch Sports Cardiology Section of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to preventive measures worldwide. With the decline of infection rates, less stringent restrictions for sports and exercise are being implemented. COVID-19 is associated with significant cardiovascular complications; however there are limited data on cardiovascular complications and long-term outcomes in both competitive (elite) athletes and highly active individuals. Based on different categories of disease severity (asymptomatic, regional/systemic symptoms, hospitalisation, myocardial damage, and/or myocarditis), in this point-of-view article we offer the (sports) cardiologist or sports physician in the Netherlands a practical guide to pre-participation screening, and diagnostic and management strategies in all athletes >16 years of age after COVID-19 infection

Unexploited potential of risk factor treatment in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND: Most patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease remain at (very) high risk for recurrent events due to suboptimal risk factor control. AIMS: This study aimed to quantify the potential of maximal risk factor treatment on 10-year and lifetime risk of recurrent atherosclerotic cardiovascular events in patients 1 year after a coronary event. METHODS AND RESULTS: Pooled data from six studies are as follows: RESPONSE 1, RESPONSE 2, OPTICARE, EUROASPIRE IV, EUROASPIRE V, and HELIUS. Patients aged ≥45 years at ≥6 months after coronary event were included. The SMART-REACH score was used to estimate 10-year and lifetime risk of recurrent atherosclerotic cardiovascular events with current treatment and potential risk reduction and gains in event-free years with maximal treatment (lifestyle and pharmacological). In 3230 atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease patients (24% women), at median interquartile range (IQR) 1.1 years (1.0-1.8) after index event, 10-year risk was median (IQR) 20% (15-27%) and lifetime risk 54% (47-63%). Whereas 70% used conventional medication, 82% had ≥1 drug-modifiable risk factor not on target. Furthermore, 91% had ≥1 lifestyle-related risk factor not on target. Maximizing therapy was associated with a potential reduction of median (IQR) 10-year risk to 6% (4-8%) and of lifetime risk to 20% (15-27%) and a median (IQR) gain of 7.3 (5.4-10.4) atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease event-free years. CONCLUSIONS: Amongst patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, maximizing current, guideline-based preventive therapy has the potential to mitigate a large part of their risk of recurrent events and to add a clinically important number of event-free years to their lifetime

Barsten in het rookverbod in horecagelegenheden

The first exemption to the comprehensive ban on smoking in public places in the Netherlands was made on 14 May 2009. The exemption was based on a technicality in the wording of the law, and could potentially lead to further exemptions to the smoking ban being made. The authors argue that focusing solely on the wording is a sidetrack in the main discussion. Furthermore, they argue that the smoking ban only bans smoking in public places and that the individual's right to perform actions potentially hazardous to their own health should not be limited, as long as it puts no-one else at risk. That is exactly what smoking in public places does. They also argue that other legislative measures comparable to the smoking ban are already in effect. In conclusion, the ban on smoking in public places does not remove the right to smoke, but serves to create a healthier social environment for everyon

Patients' preferences for secondary prevention following a coronary event

Objective:Despite clear evidence on the effectiveness of secondary prevention, patients with coronary artery disease frequently fail to reach guideline-based risk factor targets. Integrating patients’ preferences into treatment decisions has been recommended to reduce this gap. However, this requires knowledge about patient treatment preferences. Therefore, through a survey study, we aimed to explore which risk factors patients self-perceived, prioritised for improvement, and needed support with after a recent hospitalisation for coronary heart disease. Methods: A digital questionnaire was presented to patients &gt; 18 years recently discharged (≤3 months) from an acute coronary care unit in the Netherlands (Europe). Patients could select from eight cardiovascular risk factors that they (1) self-perceived, (2) prioritised for improvement, and (3) needed support to improve. Patients’ perceived risk factors were compared to those documented in the medical records. Results: Respondents (N = 254, 26 % women), mean age 64 (SD 10) years, identified ‘physical inactivity’ more frequently than their medical records (140 patients vs. 91 records, p &lt; 0.001), while three other risk factors were reported with equal and four with lower frequency. ‘Physical inactivity’, ‘overweight’ and ‘stress’ were most frequently prioritised for improvement (82 %, 88 % and 78 %) and professional support (64 %, 50 % and 58 %), with 87 % preferring lifestyle optimisation if this would reduce drug use. Conclusions: Patients with a recent coronary event show significant disparities in identifying risk factors compared to their medical records. They tend to prefer improving lifestyle- over drug-modifiable risk factors, particularly physical inactivity, overweight and stress, and indicate the need for support in improving these factors.</p