Akut koroner sendrom sonrası erken dönem izlemde özelleşmiş korunma polikliniklerinin rolü

Objective: This study aimed to investigate the effect of specialized prevention clinics and standard clinics follow-ups on secondary protection after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) on cardiovascular risk factors.Methods: A total of 118 patients who received thrombolytic therapy after being diagnosed with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were followed up for 6 months. After ACS, patients in a specialized prevention clinic (Group 1) (n=67) and those in a standard clinic (Group 2) (n=51) were compared in terms of the change in their lifestyle, management of risk factors, and drug compliance.Results: No significant difference was found between groups in terms of baseline clinical and laboratory findings except for triglyceride level (Group 1: median 174 mg/dL; Group 2: median 136 mg/dL; p=0.039). Six months after indexing, smoking cessation (72.4% vs. 50%, p=0.037), diet compliance (43% vs.19.6%, p=0.012), and exercise rates (31% vs. 13.7%, p=0.044) were significantly higher in Group 1. Although the weight control rate was higher in Group 1, no significant difference was noted between the groups (27% vs. 15.6%, p=0.219). The rate of systolic and diastolic blood pressures ;gt;140/90 mm Hg was significantly higher in Group 2 (23.5% vs. 9%, p=0.029) at 6 months. The median low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) value was significantly lower in Group 1 patients (Group 1: 91 mg/dL; Group 2: 102 mg/dL; p=0.042). Moreover, the rate of LDL-C ;lt;=70 mg/dL or ;gt;=50% reduction compared with baseline was significantly higher in Group 1 (32.8% vs. 13.7%, p=0.016). Although the recommended treatments were similar in both groups, the statin use rate was significantly higher in Group 1 (95.5% vs. 80.3%, p=0.021) at 6 months.Conclusion: The results of the study showed that specialized prevention clinics were more effective during the management of cardiovascular risk factors after ACS.Amaç: Akut koroner sendrom (AKS) sonrasında ikincil korumada yapılandırılmış poliklinik ile standart poliklinik takibinin kardiyovasküler risk faktörlerinin kontrolündeki etkisinin araştırılması.Yöntemler: ST-segment yükselmeli miyokart enfarktüsü tanısıyla trombolitik tedavi alan 118 hasta altı ay takip edildi. Akut koroner sendrom sonrasında yapılandırılmış poliklinikte (Grup 1) takipli hastalar (n=67) ile standart poliklinikte (Grup 2) takipli hastalar (n=51); yaşam şekli değişikliği, risk faktörlerinin yönetimi ve ilaç uyumu açısından karşılaştırıldı.Bulgular: Gruplar arasında trigliserit düzeyi dışında (Grup 1 medyan 174 mg/dL, Grup 2 medyan 136 mg/dL; p=0.039) bazal klinik ve laboratuvar özellikleri açısından fark saptanmadı. İndeks olaydan altı ay sonra Grup 1'de sigara bırakma (%72.4'e karşın %50; p=0.037), önerilen diyete uyma (%43'e karşın %19.6; p=0.012) ve egzersiz yapma oranları (%31'e karşın %13.7; p=0.044) anlamlı olarak daha yüksek idi. Kilo kontrol oranı Grup 1'de daha yüksek olmasına rağmen gruplar arasında anlamlı fark saptanmadı (%27'ye karşın %15.6; p=0.219). Altıncı ayda sistolik ve diyastolik kan basıncı >140/90 mmHg olanların oranı Grup 2' de anlamlı olarak daha yüksek saptandı (%23.5'e karşın %9; p=0.029). Grup 1 hastalarında medyan LDL-K değeri belirgin olarak düşük saptandı (Grup 1, 91 mg/dL, Grup 2, 102 mg/dL; p=0.042). Ayrıca LDL-K =70 mg/dL veya bazale göre >=%50 azalma olanların oranı Grup 1'de belirgin yüksek idi (%32.8'e karşın %13.7; p=0.016). Altıncı ay kontrolde önerilen tedaviler açısından fark yok iken Grup 1'de statin kullanım oranı belirgin yüksek idi (%95.5'e karşın %80.3; p=0.021).Sonuç: Çalışmamızın sonuçları yapılandırılmış polikliniklerin AKS sonrasında kardiyovasküler risk faktörlerinin yönetiminde daha etkin olduğu göstermektedir

Gender-related clinical and management differences in patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction

WOS: 000588830800001PubMed: 33063424Aim Gender-related differences have been described in the clinical characteristics and management of patients with chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, published data are conflictive in this regard. Methods We investigated differences in clinical and management variables between male and female patients from the ATA study, a prospective, multicentre, observational study that included 1462 outpatients with chronic HFrEF between January and June 2019. Results Study population was predominantly male (70.1%). in comparison to men, women with chronic HFrEF were older (66 +/- 11 years vs 69 +/- 12 years, P < .001), suffered more hospitalisations and presented more frequently with NYHA class III or IV symptoms. Ischaemic heart disease was more frequent in men, whereas anaemia, thyroid disease and depression were more frequent in women. No difference was seen between genders in the use rate of renin-angiotensin system inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, or ivabradine, or in the proportion of patients achieving target doses of these drugs. Regarding device therapies, men were more often treated with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and women received more cardiac resynchronisation therapy. Conclusion in summary, although management seemed to be equivalent between genders, women tended to present with more symptoms, require hospitalisation more frequently and have different comorbidities than men. These results highlight the importance of gender-related differences in HFrEF and call for further research to clarify the causes of these disparities. Gender-specific recommendations should be included in future guidelines in HFrEF

Adherence to guideline-directed medical and device Therapy in outpAtients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: The ATA study

Objective: Despite recommendations from heart failure guidelines on the use of pharmacologic and device therapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), important inconsistencies in guideline adherence persist in practice. The aim of this study was to assess adherence to guideline-directed medical and device therapy for the treatment of patients with chronic HFrEF (left ventricular ejection fraction ?40%). Methods: The Adherence to guideline-directed medical and device Therapy in outpAtients with HFrEF (ATA) study is a prospective, multicenter, observational study conducted in 24 centers from January 2019 to June 2019. Results: The study included 1462 outpatients (male: 70.1%, mean age: 67±11 years, mean LVEF: 30%±6%) with chronic HFrEF. Renin–angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and ivabradin were used in 78.2%, 90.2%, 55.4%, and 12.1% of patients, respectively. The proportion of patients receiving target doses of medical treatments was 24.6% for RAS inhibitors, 9.9% for beta-blockers, and 10.5% for MRAs. Among patients who met the criteria for implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), only 16.9% of patients received an ICD (167 of 983) and 34% (95 of 279) of patients underwent CRT (95 of 279). Conclusion: The ATA study shows that most HFrEF outpatients receive RAS inhibitors and beta-blockers but not MRAs or ivabradin when the medical reasons for nonuse, such as drug intolerance or contraindications, are taken into account. In addition, most eligible patients with HFrEF do not receive target doses of pharmacological treatments or guideline-recommended device therapy. (Anatol J Cardiol 2020; 24: 32-40) Keywords: adherence, chronic heart failure, device therapy, guidelines, pharmacological treatment, outpatient

Adherence to guideline-directed medical and device Therapy in outpAtients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: the ATA study

Objective: Despite recommendations from heart failure guidelines on the use of pharmacologic and device therapy in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), important inconsistencies in guideline adherence persist in practice. The aim of this study was to assess ad-herence to guideline-directed medical and device therapy for the treatment of patients with chronic HFrEF (left ventricular ejection fraction ?40%).Methods: The Adherence to guideline-directed medical and device Therapy in outpAtients with HFrEF (ATA) study is a prospective, multicenter, observational study conducted in 24 centers from January 2019 to June 2019.Results: The study included 1462 outpatients (male: 70.1%, mean age: 67±11 years, mean LVEF: 30%±6%) with chronic HFrEF. Renin–angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors, beta-blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs), and ivabradin were used in 78.2%, 90.2%, 55.4%, and 12.1% of patients, respectively. The proportion of patients receiving target doses of medical treatments was 24.6% for RAS inhibitors, 9.9% for beta-blockers, and 10.5% for MRAs. Among patients who met the criteria for implantable cardioverter–defibrillator (ICD) and cardiac resynchro-nization therapy (CRT), only 16.9% of patients received an ICD (167 of 983) and 34% (95 of 279) of patients underwent CRT (95 of 279).Conclusion: The ATA study shows that most HFrEF outpatients receive RAS inhibitors and beta-blockers but not MRAs or ivabradin when the medical reasons for nonuse, such as drug intolerance or contraindications, are taken into account. In addition, most eligible patients with HFrEF do not receive target doses of pharmacological treatments or guideline-recommended device therapy. (Anatol J Cardiol 2020; 24: 32-40