Challenges in Optimizing Lipid Management in Women.

While there are physiologic differences in lipid metabolism in men and women, pharmacologic therapy is very effective in both with similar management strategies recommended in the current guidelines for the management of dyslipidemia. Despite similar guidelines for treatment, studies have shown that women have worse control of dyslipidemia than their male counterparts. This may stem from multiple contributing factors including underestimation of cardiovascular disease risk in women, decreased prescription and utilization of lipid-lowering therapies, decreased medication adherence, and higher risk of statin intolerance, all of which may contribute to lower attainment of lipid targets. Furthermore, heart disease is the leading cause of mortality in women, with heart disease noted an average of 7-10 years later than in men. This has historically led to the misperception that women are protected from heart disease and can be treated less aggressively. In fact, traditional risk factors for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease often impact risk in women to a greater extent than they do in men. Unique risk factors such as pregnancy-related disorders also contribute to the level of risk and therefore warrant consideration in risk stratification. This review summarizes the efficacy of contemporary lipid-lowering therapies in women versus men and discusses the challenges that arise with lipid management in women along with potential ways to tackle these obstacles.

Coronary Revascularization in High-Risk Stable Patients With Significant Comorbidities: Challenges in Decision-Making.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is a growing cohort of complex high-risk patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) who present for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). These patients are older, have complex coronary disease, and a substantial comorbidity burden including frailty. The procedural risks and outcomes of CABG and PCI in these patients are more difficult to assess based on the available literature, which has generally studied a younger population with a lower comorbidity burden. RECENT FINDINGS: There have been initiatives to recalibrate and expand risk models derived from procedural registries to inform the care of complex higher-risk patients, including patients "turned down" for CABG. There is greater recognition of the need for improved assessment of risk, quality, and benefits of coronary revascularization in higher-risk SIHD patients with a substantial comorbidity burden. Clinicians and patients should be aware that there are significant evidence gaps regarding revascularization in complex high-risk patients. The limitations of procedural-derived risk scores should be understood when presenting treatment options. Future randomized controlled trials and expanded registries are greatly desired and should be achievable. Meanwhile, a multidisciplinary heart team approach should be employed for proper decision-making.