Impact of a virtual lipid clinic on lipid-lowering therapy, LDL cholesterol levels, and outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome

Which Parameter Related to Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol is Superior for Predicting the Recurrence of Myocardial Infarction in Young Patients with Previous Coronary Heart Disease? A Real-World Study

Background

Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a well-established strategy for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD). However, the effectiveness of specific LDL-C parameters in predicting myocardial infarction (MI) recurrence in real-world settings remains inadequately explored. This study aims to examine the relationship between MI recurrence and various LDL-C parameters in young CHD patients.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study involved 1013 patients aged 18-44 at the time of initial CHD diagnosis, collected from the cardiology department clinics at Beijing Anzhen Hospital between October 2022 and October 2023. LDL-C levels were assessed at the time of CHD diagnosis and at the final follow-up. The primary outcome was MI events, analyzed using survival analysis and logistic regression models to determine associations with LDL-C parameters.

Results

The study included 1013 patients (mean age: 38.5 ± 3.9 years; 94.7% men), with a median follow-up time of 1.7 years. Initially, 13.6% had LDL-C levels <1.8 mmol/L, which increased to 37.8% by the study's end. During follow-up, 96 patients (9.5%) experienced MI. While LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L at baseline showed a slightly lower cumulative incidence of MI than LDL-C ≥1.8 mmol/L, the difference was not statistically significant (log-rank p = 0.335). Reductions in LDL-C levels of ≥50% and the patterns of change did not correlate with decreased MI risk. However, LDL-C <1.4 mmol/L at the final measurement was associated with a reduced MI risk (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.33-0.98) compared with LDL-C ≥2.6 mmol/L.

Conclusions

This study suggests that the most important parameter related to LDL-C for predicting the recurrence of MI in young patients with a history of CHD is the ideal target LDL-C level. Lowering LDL-C to <1.4 mmol/L could potentially reduce MI risk, regardless of baseline LDL-C levels.

Learnings from Implementation Strategies to Improve Lipid Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lowering low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol reduces cardiovascular risk. International lipid management guidelines recommend LDL-cholesterol goals or thresholds for initiating lipid-lowering therapy. However, contemporary real-world studies have shown that many high- and very high-risk patients are not attaining LDL-cholesterol goals and are not receiving intensive lipid-lowering therapies. In this review, recent examples of implementation strategies for optimising lipid management are discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

Implementation studies are heterogenous in their strategies and design. At the clinician level, multidisciplinary team-based care (including multidisciplinary lipid clinics), pharmacist- or nurse-led interventions, decision-support algorithms or protocols, and educational initiatives have shown potential to improve lipid management. Various strategies to improve patient adherence to lipid-lowering therapies have demonstrated at least short-term efficacy, including education, shared decision-making, behavioural support and nudges. Electronic health records can be leveraged at low cost to identify patients requiring initiation or intensification of lipid-lowering therapies, but the optimal method of integrating automated alerts or nudges to influence decision-making requires further research. Moreover, telehealth and remote care delivery models can improve access to healthcare and facilitate lipid-lowering. Multifaceted strategies with a systematic approach to targeting clinician, patient and system related factors can be successful in improving lipid management. Future implementation research should evaluate longer-term outcomes and follow implementation science theories, models and/or frameworks at all stages. By doing so, ongoing implementation studies will help researchers better understand the impact, sustainability and scalability of strategies, and where barriers and facilitators to lipid management may exist in other contexts.

Role and impact of a specialized cardiometabolic clinic in managing high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

Background

Lipid-related risk and residual cardiovascular risk remain high in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Significant treatment gaps exist in implementation of pluripotent and effective therapies that reduce these risks.

Objective

This study evaluates the efficacy and impact of a dedicated, standalone cardiometabolic clinic designed to address treatment gaps through streamlined management and optimization of treatment strategies.

Methods

We retrospectively collected data from the first 400 patients with T2D and ASCVD who underwent treatment at the clinic and presented for at least one follow-up visit. These patients were primarily managed for their cardiometabolic risks and received intensified lipid-lowering therapies, including adjunct non-statin therapies.

Results

Significant findings included increased use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) to 84 % and 65 %, respectively, with 94 % of patients eventually on one therapy and 55 % on dual therapy. Increases in lipid-lowering therapies led to 89 % of patients achieving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels below patient-specific thresholds for intensification.

Conclusion

This care model effectively manages high-risk patient needs, achieving significant intensification of lipid-lowering therapies and broad use of cardiometabolic drugs, and highlights the clinic's potential to serve as a model for similar high-risk populations.

Strategies of improving adherence to lipid-lowering therapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lowering LDL-C has been shown to reduce ASCVD events, yet many ASCVD patients do not achieve their guideline-directed LDL-C goals leaving patients at increased risk of another ASCVD event. This review discusses implementation strategies to improve guideline-directed lipid management in patients with ASCVD focusing on the provider, patient, and system level.

RECENT FINDINGS

At a provider level, under-prescribing of statin intensity due most often to statin intolerance, clinical inertia, insufficient monitoring of LDL-C levels, and the difficulty and cost of prescribing other lipid-lowering therapies such as the PCSK9 inhibitors leads to suboptimal cholesterol management in ASCVD patients. Patients concerns about medication side effects and lack of understanding of their ASCVD risk are causes of poor adherence to their lipid-lowering therapy as are barriers at a system level.

SUMMARY

To improve cholesterol management in ASCVD patients will require an integrated approach targeting the provider, the patient and the system. There is a need for further education of clinicians on the importance of intensive LDL-C lowering in ASCVD patients and greater use of nonstatin LDL-C-lowering therapies for those patients on a maximally tolerated statin who have not achieved their guideline-directed LDL-C goal. This will require shared decision-making with a focus on patient education and patient-clinician communication so that the clinician's goals and aims align with that of the patient.

[Primary and secondary prevention in hypercholesterolemia: differences relevant to patient care in the PROCYON trial]

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease accounts for one third of deaths in Germany. Elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) are considered a major risk factor. Lowering LDL-C levels is therefore an integral part of the prevention of cardiovascular events.

METHODS

The aim of this work is to identify potential differences between primary prevention (PP) and secondary prevention (SP) by means of a post-hoc comparison of cross-sectional data from the PROCYON survey. Medical history, concomitant diseases, adherence, and disease awareness in relation to hypercholesterolemia were queried.

RESULTS

5,494 patients had participated in the survey (PP: 3,798; SP: 1,696). Comparison of the results showed a numerically higher proportion of women (PP 70.7% vs. SP 42.5%) as well as more frequent comorbidities such as hypertension (PP 45.6% vs. SP 61.0%), obesity (PP 20.9% vs. SP 27.4%), and type 2 diabetes mellitus (PP 14.1% vs. SP 23.8%). In primary prevention, hypercholesterolemia was most often diagnosed during screening (PP 74.6%), and in secondary prevention, the diagnosis was most often made during cardiovascular-related hospitalization (SP 58.0%). A cardiologist was consulted by 16.3% (PP) and 54.0% (SP) of patients, respectively. At least semiannual LDL-C checks (PP 46.8% vs. SP 77.9%) and drug intervention (PP 43.0% vs. SP 87.0%) were more frequent in the secondary prevention group. In addition, differences in the implementation of lifestyle changes, improvement of LDL-C levels, adjustment of therapy as well as adherence, treatment satisfaction and patient knowledge were observed.

CONCLUSION

The comparison of primary and secondary prevention from the PROCYON survey shows overall better utilization of treatment options and higher intensity of care in the secondary prevention group. However, there is still great potential for improvement in both groups to ensure efficient prevention of cardiovascular events.

A Systematic Review of Lipid Management in Secondary Prevention and Comparison of International Lipid Management Pathways

Acute coronary syndrome remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality despite significant improvements in its prevention and management. Lipid management and other risk factors such as hypertension, diabetes, obesity, smoking and sedentary lifestyle stratification is the key to minimising this risk. Lipid management is an important part of secondary prevention and patients are historically undertreated after post-acute coronary syndrome. We performed a narrative review on observational studies on lipid management pathways post ACS on PubMed, Google Scholar, Journal Storage and ScienceDirect and excluded case reports, case series and randomized controlled trials. Our review showed that most patients following acute coronary syndrome receive suboptimal treatment for hypercholesterolemia. The role of statin in reducing future cardiac events risk is undisputable, however, statin intolerance remains a major concern. There is substantial variation in the management of lipids in patients following an acute cardiac event and patients were followed up in primary care in some countries and secondary care in others. The mortality risk is significantly high in patients with second or recurrent cardiac events and future cardiac events are associated with higher morbidity and mortality risk. There is significant variation in lipid management pathways in patients who suffer from cardiac events across the globe and lipid therapy optimization remains suboptimal in these patients, putting them at future risk of cardiovascular events. It is therefore imperative to optimally manage dyslipidemia in these patients in order to minimize the risk of subsequent cardiac events. Cardiac rehabilitation programs might be a way forward to incorporate lipid management for patients discharged from the hospital after having acute coronary events for lipid therapy optimization.

Different Perspectives of Patients and Physicians on LDL-C Target Achievement in the Treatment of Hypercholesterolemia: Results on Secondary Prevention from the German PROCYON Survey

AIMS

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction in hypercholesterolemia patients at very high cardiovascular (CV) risk is essential in preventing future CV events. The objective was to assess the perception on hypercholesterolemia management in secondary prevention in Germany.

METHODS

PROCYON was a two-part online survey, including a patient questionnaire as well as a physician questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 109 general practitioners, internists, and cardiologists participated. The current ESC/EAS recommendation for high-risk patients is followed by 19.3% of the physicians. The majority (80.7%) reported an LDL-C target failure rate of at least 30%. More than two thirds (71.6%) have stated treating less than half of their patients with the maximum approved statin dose. The survey included 1696 secondary prevention patients. The majority (86.7%) consult their general practitioner for hypercholesterolemia; 54.0% consult a cardiologist (multiple answers allowed). Most patients (87.0%) were receiving lipid-lowering medication. Among these, 800 (54.2%) reported improved LDL-C levels since diagnosis, 569 (38.6%) reported no improvement, and 106 (7.2%) had no information. Of the treated patients with (N' = 800) and without (N' = 569) improvement, 34.3% vs. 37.3% were on their initial drug and dose, 24.8% vs. 23.7% received multiple drug therapy, 48.9% vs. 48.9% reported a dose change, and 16.1% vs. 14.2% had discontinued at least one drug (multiple answers). Disease knowledge was rated as good or very good by 29.8% of patients.

CONCLUSION

PROCYON demonstrated insufficient ESC/EAS guideline implementation regarding target levels and therapeutic escalation strategies. Furthermore, a lack of specialist involvement and patient education was identified.