Lifestyle interventions and nutraceuticals: Guideline-based approach to cardiovascular disease prevention

Abstract Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels is associated with a well-documented reduction in cardiovascular (CV) disease (CVD) risk. Current guidelines and literature support lifestyle interventions as the primary strategy for reducing CV risk. Association of dietary modifications (such as the Mediterranean diet), physical activity and the cessation of smoking with reduced CV morbidity and mortality has been evidenced. Where lifestyle interventions are not adequate for lowering LDL-C levels and CV risk, pharmacological therapies, most commonly statins, may also be considered. The benefits of lifestyle and pharmacological interventions in the prevention of CVD are widely known, but poor adherence and persistence to these necessitate an approach that aims to improve LDL-C lowering for CVD prevention. Nutraceuticals (targeted functional foods or dietary supplements of plant or microbial origin) are included in EU guidelines as lifestyle interventions and may provide an additional approach to controlling LDL-C levels when a pharmaceutical intervention is not (yet) indicated. However, among different nutraceuticals, the level of clinical evidence supportive of efficacy for lipid lowering needs to be considered. Meta-analyses of randomised clinical trials have demonstrated that some nutraceuticals (e.g. red yeast rice and berberine) and some nutraceutical combinations improve lipid profiles, including lowering of LDL-C, total cholesterol and triglyceride levels. Therefore, nutraceuticals may be considered in specific patient groups where there is appropriate evidence to support the efficacy and safety

Real-World Attainment of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Goals in Patients at High Risk of Cardiovascular Disease Treated with High-Intensity Statins: The TERESA Study

Despite steady improvements in cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention, a scarce proportion of patients achieve the recommended LDL-C goals, even under high-intensity lipid-lowering therapy (LLT). Our study aimed to evaluate the attainment rate of LDL-C targets recommended by the 2019 European guidelines, and to characterize potential factors associated with LDL-C goal achievement and change patterns in LLT. We conducted a retrospective, observational study on patients treated with high-intensity atorvastatin or rosuvastatin +/- ezetimibe at cardiology and internal medicine clinics across Spain. It included 1570 evaluable patients (median age: 62 years; established CVD: 77.5% [myocardial infarction: 34.3%]; and 85.8% at very high cardiovascular risk). Rosuvastatin +/- ezetimibe was the LLT in 52.2% of patients, and atorvastatin +/- ezetimibe in 47.8%. LLT had been modified in 36.8% of patients (side effects: 10%), being the most common switch from atorvastatin- to rosuvastatin-based treatment (77.2%). The risk-based LDL-C goal attainment rate was 31.1%, with 78.2% high-risk and 71.7% very high-risk patients not achieving the recommended LDL-C targets. Established CVD and familial hypercholesterolemia were significantly associated with the non-achievement of LDL-C goals. Although having limitations, this study shows that the guideline-recommended LDL-C goal attainment rate is still suboptimal despite using high-intensity statin therapy in a real-world setting in Spain

Blood pressure and lipid control and coronary risk in the hypertensive population attended in Primary Care setting in Spain. The PRESCOT study

[Resumen] Objetivo y métodos. El objetivo de este trabajo, de diseño transversal y multicéntrico, fue conocer el perfil de riesgo coronario de los pacientes hipertensos que acuden a la consulta de Atención Primaria, y evaluar si el control de presión arterial y de colesterol LDL podía variar según el grupo de riesgo coronario ATP-III. Se consideró buen control de presión arterial cifras menores a 140/90 mmHg (< 130/80 mmHg en diabéticos) y de colesterol LDL los establecidos para ATP-III para cada grupo de riesgo. Resultados. Se incluyeron 12.954 pacientes (49,9% mujeres, 62,1 ± 10,7 años). El 12,6% pertenecía al grupo de bajo riesgo, el 45% al de riesgo medio y el 42,4% al de riesgo alto. El grado de control fue diferente según el grupo de riesgo (p < 0,0001). Así, para la presión arterial se alcanzó en un 37,5% de los sujetos de riesgo bajo, en un 30,2% de los del grupo de riesgo medio y en un 15,4% de los de riesgo alto, y para el colesterol LDL se consiguió en el 65,6% del grupo de riesgo bajo, el 28% del de riesgo medio y el 12,3% del de riesgo alto. Globalmente, si consideramos el control adecuado de presión arterial y de colesterol LDL, sólo el 25,8% de los de bajo riesgo estaba controlado, el 9,6% de los de riesgo medio y el 2,7% de los de riesgo alto. Conclusiones. La mayoría de los hipertensos asistidos diariamente en Atención Primaria en España son de riesgo medio o alto. Las cifras de control de presión arterial y colesterol LDL en los hipertensos en general son bajas y son muy pocos los pacientes que tienen cifras adecuadas de ambos factores de riesgo. Pero las tasas de control son aún peores según aumenta el riesgo coronario; de hecho, menos del 3% de los pacientes de alto riesgo tienen bien controlados ambos parámetros, con las implicaciones clínicas que ello conlleva.[Abstract] Objectives and methods. The aim of this cross-sectional and multicenter study was to determine the coronary risk of hypertensive patients attended in Spanish Primary Care and to evaluate whether blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol (LDL-c) control rates could change according to the ATP-III risk groups. Good blood pressure control was considered <140/90 mmHg (<130/80 mmHg for diabetics) and LDL-c according to the established by ATP-III for every risk group. Results. A total of 12,954 patients were included in the study (49.9 % women, mean age 62.1±10.7 years). Of these, 12.6% belonged to the group of low risk, 45% to the medium risk group and 42.4% to the high risk group. The control rates were different according to the risk group (p <0.0001). Blood pressure control: 37.5 % in low risk, 30.2 % in medium and 15.4 % in high risk group. LDL-c control: 65.6 % in low risk group, 28 % in medium risk group and 12.3 % in high risk group. Only 25.8 % of the patients of low risk were controlled for both blood pressure and LDL-c, 9.6 % of medium risk group and 2.7 % of high risk group. Conclusions. The majority of hypertensive patients daily attended in Primary Care setting in Spain belongs to the medium or high coronary risk groups. Blood pressure and LDL-c controls rates in hypertensive population are low, and very few patients have both risk factors controlled. The control rates decline when the risk increases. In fact, less than 3% of high-risk patients have both parameters well controlled, what may result in significant clinical implications

A new index to predict quality of anticoagulation control in patients on vitamin K antagonists: the DAFNE score

[Abstract] Aim: To derive a new clinical score to improve the prediction of those at risk of poor International Normalized Ratio control among patients with atrial fibrillation taking vitamin K antagonists. Materials & methods: The score was calculated using PAULA database and validated in the FANTASIIA population. Results: The DAFNE score (cardiovascular Disease, concomitant treatment with Amiodarone, Food/dietary transgression and taking ≥7 pills daily, fEemale sex) score was related to a higher probability of poor International Normalized Ratio control. C-indexes were 0.611 and 0.576 (De Long test, p = 0.007) for the DAFNE and SAMe-TT2R2 scores, respectively. Conclusion: The DAFNE score is a new clinical score which may potentially help determine those patients with atrial fibrillation who are at high risk of poor anticoagulation control with vitamin K antagonists

Cardiovascular Risk in Patients with Dyslipidemia and Their Degree of Control as Perceived by Primary Care Physicians in a Survey—TERESA-Opinion Study

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate, through a survey, the opinion of primary care (PC) physicians on the magnitude of dyslipidemia and its degree of control in their clinical practice. Materials and methods: An ecological study was carried out, in which the physicians were invited to participate by means of an online letter. Data were collected at a single timepoint and were based only on the experience, knowledge, and routine clinical practice of the participating physician. Results: A total of 300 physicians answered the questionnaire and estimated the prevalence of dyslipidemia between 2% and 80%. They estimated that 23.5% of their patients were high-risk, 18.2% were very high-risk, and 14.4% had recurrent events in the last 2 years. The PC physicians considered that 61.5% of their patients achieved the targets set. The participants fixed the presence of side-effects to statins at 14%. The statin that was considered safest with regard to side-effects was rosuvastatin (69%). Conclusions: PC physicians in Spain perceive that the CVR of their patients is high. This, together with the overestimation of the degree of control of LDL-C, could justify the inertia in the treatment of lipids. Moreover, they perceive that one-sixth of the patients treated with statins have side-effects

Adequacy of the treatment of hypertensive patients with metabolic syndrome

[Resumen] Fundamento y objetivo. El objetivo de este estudio ha sido conocer el tratamiento de los pacientes hipertensos con síndrome metabólico (SM) asistidos en atención primaria y el grado de control de la presión arterial y de los valores de colesterol unido a lipoproteínas de baja densidad (cLDL), y comparar los datos con los de la población hipertensa sin SM. Pacientes y método. Se analizó al subgrupo de pacientes con SM de los incluidos en el etudio PRESCOT (estudio transversal de personas con hipertensión mayores 18 años asistidos en atención primaria). La población PRESCOT fue de 12.954 pacientes (el 49,9% mujeres), con una edad media (desviación estándar [DE]) de 62,1 (10,7) años. Para el diagnóstico de SM se utilizaron los criterios del National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP-ATP III). Resultados. Cumplían criterios de SM un total de 6.736 (52%) pacientes del estudio PRESCOT, cuya edad media (DE) era de 62,3 (10,5) años; el 43,9% eran varones. El 98,2% de los pacientes con SM tomaba algún fármaco y el 80,5%, al menos 2 fármacos. A pesar de que los hipertensos con SM tomaban más antihipertensivos que aquellos sin SM (un 45,3 frente al 36,6% tomaban más de un fármaco; p < 0,001) y usaban en mayor medida hipolipemiantes (el 43 frente al 39,1%; p < 0,001), el control de la presión arterial (según las guías europeas) y de cLDL (según ATP-III) fue peor en los pacientes con SM (el 17,2 frente al 33,6% y el 17,2 frente al 35,7%, respectivamente; p < 0,0001). Sólo el 4,7% de los pacientes con SM tenía bien controlados ambos factores –presión arterial y cLDL–, frente al 13,5% del grupo sin SM (p < 0,0001). Conclusiones. La presencia de SM en la población hipertensa de atención primaria en España es muy frecuente. A pesar de que a los pacientes hipertensos con SM se les prescriben más fármacos antihipertensivos y más hipolipemiantes, el control de la presión arterial y del cLDL es peor que en los pacientes sin SM.[Abstract] Background and objective. The aim of this study was to know the treatment of hypertensive patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS) attended in primary care setting, as well as the blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol (LDL-c) rates, and to compare these data with those of the hypertensive population without MetS. Patients and method. We analyzed the subset of patients with MetS from those included in the PRESCOT study (a cross-sectional study of hypertensive subjects >18 years attended in primary care). The PRESCOT population was composed by 12,954 patients (49.9% females; 62.1±10.7 years). MetS was diagnosed according to NCEP-ATP-III criteria. Results. 6,736 (52%) patients fulfilled diagnosis criteria of MetS (mean age 62.3±10.5 years; 43.9% males). Almost all MetS patients (98.2%) were on any medication, and 80.5% were at least on two drugs. Despite hypertensive MetS patients were treated with more antihypertensive medications (45.3% vs 36.6% were on two or more drugs, p < 0.001) and used more lipid-lowering agents (43% vs 39.1%, p < 0.001) than patients without MetS, the blood pressure control (according to European guidelines) and LDL-c control (according to NCEP-ATP III) rates were lower in patients with MetS (17.2% vs 33.6% and 17.2% vs 35.7%, p < 0.0001). Only 4.7% of patients with MetS were adequately controlled for both factors, LDL-c and blood pressure, vs 13.5% of patients without MetS, (p < 0.0001). Conclusions. The presence of MetS in the hypertensive population attended in Spanish primary care settings is very common. Even though in hypertensives with MetS more drugs are prescribed, blood pressure and LDL-c control rates are worse in this population than in patients without MetS

Prevalence of the metabolic syndrome in patients with hypertension treated in general practice in Spain: an assessment of blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol control and accuracy of diagnosis

[Abstract] This study was designed to evaluate whether primary care physicians in Spain accurately diagnose the metabolic syndrome in hypertensive patients, to define the profile and management of these patients in clinical practice, and to ascertain the level of blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol control. Data were analyzed from a cross-sectional survey involving 12,954 patients with hypertension (Prevención Cardiovascular en España en Atención Primaria: Intervención Sobre el Colesterol en Hipertensión [PRESCOT] study), wherein 52% of the cohort fulfilled the National Cholesterol Education Program-Adult Treatment Panel criteria for the metabolic syndrome. The majority of patients (54.6%) had 3 risk factors, 32.4% had 4, and 13% had 5 risk factors. Physician diagnosis of the metabolic syndrome was poor, with 43.7% of physicians missing the diagnosis and 12.9% wrongly diagnosing the metabolic syndrome. Blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol control rates were very low, with only 4.7% of metabolic syndrome patients achieving control for both blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol vs 13.5% for non-metabolic syndrome patients (P<.0001). These findings demonstrate that the metabolic syndrome is common in patients with hypertension and that it is generally poorly diagnosed and treated by primary care physicians