Riesgo vascular residual: recomendaciones de la Iniciativa Espa˜ola para la Reducción del Riesgo Residual

Use of expert consensus to improve atherogenic dyslipidemia management

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Although atherogenic dyslipidemia is a recognized cardiovascular risk factor, it is often underassessed and thus undertreated and poorly controlled in clinical practice. The objective of this study was to reach a multidisciplinary consensus for the establishment of a set of clinical recommendations on atherogenic dyslipidemia to optimize its prevention, early detection, diagnostic evaluation, therapeutic approach, and follow-up.

METHODS

After a review of the scientific evidence, a scientific committee formulated 87 recommendations related to atherogenic dyslipidemia, which were grouped into 5 subject areas: general concepts (10 items), impact and epidemiology (4 items), cardiovascular risk (32 items), detection and diagnosis (19 items), and treatment (22 items). A 2-round modified Delphi method was conducted to compare the opinions of a panel of 65 specialists in cardiology (23%), endocrinology (24.6%), family medicine (27.7%), and internal medicine (24.6%) on these issues.

RESULTS

After the first round, the panel reached consensus on 65 of the 87 items discussed, and agreed on 76 items by the end of the second round. Insufficient consensus was reached on 3 items related to the detection and diagnosis of atherogenic dyslipidemia and 3 items related to the therapeutic goals to be achieved in these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The external assessment conducted by experts on atherogenic dyslipidemia showed a high level of professional agreement with the proposed clinical recommendations. These recommendations represent a useful tool for improving the clinical management of patients with atherogenic dyslipidemia. A detailed analysis of the current scientific evidence is required for those statements that eluded consensus.

Type 1 diabetes, metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular risk

Patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) traditionally had a low body mass index and microangiopathic complications were common, while macroangiopathy and the metabolic syndrome were exceptional. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial, published in 1993, demonstrated that therapy aimed at maintaining HbA1c levels as close to normal as feasible reduced the incidence of microangiopathy. Since then, the use of intensive insulin therapy to optimize metabolic control became generalized. Improved glycemic control resulted in a lower incidence of microangiopathy; however, its side effects included a higher rate of severe hypoglycemia and increased weight gain. Approximately 50% of patients with T1DM are currently obese or overweight, and between 8% and 40% meet the metabolic syndrome criteria. The components of the metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance have been linked to chronic T1DM complications, and cardiovascular disease is now the leading cause of death in these patients. Therefore, new therapeutic strategies are required in T1DM subjects, not only to intensively lower glycemia, but to control all associated metabolic syndrome traits.

[Atherogenic dyslipidemia: a multidisciplinary consensus panel]

The dyslipidaemias are conditions that are still under-diagnosed, under-treated, and poorly controlled. This condition is common to the rest of the risk factors considered fundamental. Within the dyslipidaemias, the data that we have available, generally refer to the hypercholesterolaemias or in particular to the dyslipidaemias not dependent on LDL in patients who are already being treated with statins. However, there is only limited data available on atherogenic dyslipidaemia, characterised by the elevation of triglycerides and/or a decrease in HDL-cholesterol. However, given its profile, to determine the particularities of this atherogenic dyslipidaemia could help to control this anomaly more effectively. The present study, conducted in accordance with the Delphi method, has as its purpose to demonstrate the level of agreement or disagreement of an expert group, made up from different scientific societies, on what atherogenic dyslipidaemia is and represents, as well as what is the most suitable diagnostic and therapeutic approach. It has been concluded that the level of knowledge of the epidemiological aspects, its association with cardiovascular risks, of clinical identification, and specific treatment, has reached a significant level of agreement between the experts consulted. However, some aspects have been detected that, even today, are still subject to controversy: the role of isolated hypertriglyceridaemia as a risk factor, and its consideration as a therapeutic objective both in primary and secondary prevention, the effects linked to HDL-cholesterol, and that are strictly associated with the capacity to produce cholesterol efflux, the appropriateness of the therapeutic objectives to individual particularities, as well as the need to employ - frequently - combined treatment to correctly approach the correction of the lipid profile as a whole.