Evidence-based cardiovascular therapies and achievement of therapeutic goals in diabetic patients with coronary heart disease attended in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic patients have a higher rate of recurrent cardiovascular events and death than nondiabetic individuals. Although partially attributable to lower use of evidence-based preventive therapies, studies are lacking on the prescription rate during the stable phase of the disease. METHODS: Between June 1 and October 19, 2004, we obtained, from 1799 primary care centers throughout Spain, data on 8817 subjects (mean age 65.4 years, 73.7% male, 32.7% with diabetes) who had had a coronary event requiring hospitalization in the previous 6 months to 10 years. RESULTS: After adjustment for confounding variables, the diabetic patients received more frequent treatment with angiotensin-renin system blockers (73.5% vs 61%, P < .001), calcium channel blockers (29.8% vs 21.9%, P < .001), nitrates (58% vs 47.5%, P < .001), digoxin (6.6% vs 3.9%, P < .001), and diuretics (46.2% vs 32.2%, P < .001), but it is similar with respect to lipid-lowering drugs (81.1% vs 80.3%), antiplatelet drugs (80.2% vs 80.2%), or beta-blockers (45.4% vs 47.7%). The percentage of diabetic subjects attaining objectives for smoking habit, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, blood pressure, and glycated hemoglobin were 90.7%, 29%, 38.2%, and 49.7%, respectively. Only 7% had optimum control of all their risk factors. The parameters most closely related to optimum treatment and risk-factor control were the specialist follow-up and the attending physician's awareness of appropriate treatment objectives. CONCLUSIONS: A significant percentage of diabetic patients with stable coronary disease receive evidence-based preventive medications in primary care. However, the percentage achieving adequate control of their risk factors is low and is related to the level of physician awareness of appropriate therapeutic targets.

Control de factores de riesgo coronario en prevención secundaria: estudio PRESENAP / Control of coronary risk factors in secondary prevention: PRESENAP study

Fundamento y objetivo: Evaluar el grado general de consecución de objetivos de control de los factores de riesgo en prevención secundaria de los pacientes que han tenido un episodio coronario y son seguidos en atención primaria. Pacientes y método: Estudio descriptivo, transversal y multicéntrico con inclusión mediante muestreo consecutivo de los primeros 5 pacientes que acudieron a consulta y habían tenido un episodio coronario en un período previo de 6 meses a 10 años. Los objetivos de control fueron: presión arterial < 140/90 mmHg en población general y < 130/85 mmHg en diabéticos, colesterol de las lipoproteínas de baja densidad (cLDL) < 100 mg/dl y no ser fumador. Resultados: Se incluyó a 8.817 pacientes (varones el 73,7%) con una media (desviación estándar) de edad de 65,4 (10,3) años. El 76,6% eran hipertensos; el 73,4%, dislipémicos, y el 32,7%, diabéticos. El 60,2% alcanzó el objetivo de presión arterial, el 26,3% alcanzó el objetivo de cLDL < 100 mg/dl y el 11,4% siguió fumando. Cumplió la totalidad de las recomendaciones el 16,4%. Los factores relacionados de forma independiente con un buen control fueron la menor edad, el sexo masculino, el ingreso por síndrome coronario agudo sin elevación del ST (odds ratio [OR] = 1,39; intervalo de confianza [IC] del 95%, 1,01-1,93; p = 0,04) o para revascularización (OR = 1,37; IC del 95%, 1,12-1,67; p = 0,002), tener enfermedad arterial periférica (OR = 1,43; IC del 95%, 1,11-1,84; p = 0,005) y que los objetivos planteados por los médicos fueran adecuados (OR = 1,90; IC del 95%, 1,48-2,44; p < 0,0001). El control fue peor en los pacientes hipertensos o dislipémicos. Conclusiones: El control general de los factores de riesgo en prevención secundaria de la enfermedad coronaria se consigue en 1 de cada 6 pacientes atendidos en atención primaria

Background and objective: Evaluate the overall achievement of goals in the control of risk factors in secondary prevention in patients who have suffered a coronary event and are followed up in primary care centers. Patients and method: Descriptive, transversal, multicenter study with sampling by consecutive inclusion of the first 5 patients attending the doctor's office who had suffered a coronary event 6 months to 10 years previously. The targets for control were: blood pressure < 140/90 mmHg in the general population and < 130/85 mmHg in diabetics; LDL-cholesterol < 100 mg/dl and no smoking habit. Results: 8,817 patients (73.7% males) were included, with a mean (SD) age of 65.4 (10.3) years; 76.6% were hypertensive, 73.4% dyslipidemic and 32.7% diabetics; 60.2% achieved target blood pressure; 26.3% achieved LDL-cholesterol <100 mg/dl and 11.4% continued smoking; 16.4% fulfilled all recommendations. Factors independently related with good control were a lower age, male sex, patients who had been admitted with acute coronary syndrome without ST elevation (OR = 1.39; CI 95%, 1.01-1.93; p = 0.04) or for revascularization (OR = 1.37; CI 95%; 1.12-1.67; p = 0.002), patients with peripheral arterial disease (OR = 1.43; CI 95%, 1.11-1.84; p = 0.005) and when the physicians proposed suitable objectives (OR = 1.90; CI 95%, 1.48-2.44; p < 0.0001). Control was poorer in hypertensive or dyslipidemic patients. Conclusions: Overall control of risk factors in secondary prevention of coronary disease is achieved in one in six patients attending primary care

[Control of coronary risk factors in secondary prevention: PRESENAP study]. / Control de factores de riesgo coronario en prevención secundaria: estudio PRESENAP.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the overall achievement of goals in the control of risk factors in secondary prevention in patients who have suffered a coronary event and are followed up in primary care centers. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Descriptive, transversal, multicenter study with sampling by consecutive inclusion of the first 5 patients attending the doctor's office who had suffered a coronary event 6 months to 10 years previously. The targets for control were: blood pressure < 140/90 mmHg in the general population and < 130/85 mmHg in diabetics; LDL-cholesterol < 100 mg/dl and no smoking habit. RESULTS: 8,817 patients (73.7% males) were included, with a mean (SD) age of 65.4 (10.3) years; 76.6% were hypertensive, 73.4% dyslipidemic and 32.7% diabetics; 60.2% achieved target blood pressure; 26.3% achieved LDL-cholesterol <100 mg/dl and 11.4% continued smoking; 16.4% fulfilled all recommendations. Factors independently related with good control were a lower age, male sex, patients who had been admitted with acute coronary syndrome without ST elevation (OR = 1.39; CI 95%, 1.01-1.93; p = 0.04) or for revascularization (OR = 1.37; CI 95%; 1.12-1.67; p = 0.002), patients with peripheral arterial disease (OR = 1.43; CI 95%, 1.11-1.84; p = 0.005) and when the physicians proposed suitable objectives (OR = 1.90; CI 95%, 1.48-2.44; p < 0.0001). Control was poorer in hypertensive or dyslipidemic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Overall control of risk factors in secondary prevention of coronary disease is achieved in one in six patients attending primary care.

[Clinical characteristics, prognosis, and variability in the management of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. Data from the PEPA registry]. / Perfil clínico, pronóstico y variabilidad en el tratamiento del síndrome coronario agudo sin elevación del segmento ST. Datos del registro PEPA.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical characteristics and inter-hospital variability in the treatment and prognosis of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. PATIENTS AND METHOD: Data from the PEPA study, a prospective registry that enrolled 4,115 patients in 18 Spanish hospitals, were analyzed. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients enrolled was 65 years, 33% were women, and 26% had diabetes. Large differences were observed in the clinical profile of patients admitted to different centers, especially relative the history of previous disease, prior coronary revascularization, and co-morbidity. Antiplatelet treatment was used in 93% of patients, heparin in 45%, beta-blockers in 42%, nitrates in 67%, and calcium antagonists in 46%. During hospitalization, exercise stress testing was performed in 37% of patients, coronary angiography in 32%, coronary angioplasty in 9%, and coronary surgery in 4%. Inter-hospital variability was minimal for the use of antiplatelet agents, wide for the use of heparin and beta-blockers, and huge for the use of revascularization procedures. Mortality and the incidence of death or myocardial infarction were 2.6% and 4.4% during hospitalization, and 4.6% and 8% at 3 months, with wide inter-hospital variability. These differences were not significant once adjusted for clinical characteristics and the treatment received at admission. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes represent an heterogeneous group with a high incidence of complications. Pharmacologic and, especially, invasive treatment varies widely in different hospitals. These results underline the importance of correct initial risk stratification and uniform treatment following the recommendations of clinical guidelines.

[Inflammation markers and risk stratification in patients with acute coronary syndromes: design of the SIESTA Study (Systemic Inflammation Evaluation in Patients with non-ST segment elevation Acute coronary syndromes)]. / Marcadores de inflamación y estratificación de riesgo en pacientes con síndorome coronario agudo: diseño del estudio SIESTA (Systemic Inflammation Evaluation in patients with non-ST segment elevaton Acute coronary syndromes).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Evidence is growing regarding the prognostic value of markers of inflammation in unstable angina/non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (UA/NSTEMI). However, the independent value of these variables has not been systematically investigated in prospective studies. The main objective of the SIESTA study is to assess the relative prognostic roles of C-reactive protein, fibrinogen, neopterin, interleukins 6, 8, 10 and 18, tumor necrosis factor, e-selectin, endothelin 1, tissue factor, VCAM-1, ICAM-1, pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A, B-type natriuretic peptide, leukocytes, troponin I or T and serum creatine kinase-MB (CKMB) in UA/NSTEMI patients. PATIENTS AND METHOD: SIESTA is a prospective, multicenter trial involving patients with chest pain suggestive of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) within 48 hours of enrolment and at least one of the following: abnormal troponin levels, electrocardiographic signs of ischaemia or previously documented vascular disease. Clinical outcome data and serial biochemical determinations will be assessed during hospital admission and at 30, 180 and 365 days of follow-up. The TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) and PEPA (Proyecto de Estudio del Pronóstico de la Angina) risk scores will be also validated. Study variables will include death due to any cause, cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring re-admission, emergency revascularization and a composite of death, myocardial infarction and need for emergency hospitalization or myocardial revascularization. Each of these conditions will be treated as secondary end-points when assessed individually. This study will provide valuable prospective information about the prognostic value of inflammatory markers in real life ACS patients of Mediterranean origin.

Perfil clínico, pronóstico y variabilidad en el tratamiento del síndrome coronario agudo sin elevación del segmento ST. Datos del registro PEPA / Clinical characteristics, prognosis, and variability in the management of Non-ST-Segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. Data from the PEPA registry

Objetivos. Conocer el perfil clínico y la variabilidad interhospitalaria en el tratamiento y pronóstico de los pacientes con síndrome coronario agudo sin elevación del segmento ST. Pacientes y método. Se analizaron los datos del estudio PEPA, registro prospectivo que incluyó a 4.115 pacientes ingresados en 18 hospitales españoles. Resultados. La edad media fue de 65 años, un 33 por ciento eran mujeres y un 26 por ciento, diabéticos. Se observaron grandes diferencias en el tipo de pacientes ingresados en cada centro, especialmente en los antecedentes patológicos, revascularización coronaria previa y comorbilidad. El 93 por ciento de los pacientes recibieron tratamiento antiagregante, el 45 por ciento, heparina, el 42 por ciento, bloqueadores beta, el 67 por ciento, nitratos y el 46 por ciento, antagonistas del calcio. Durante el ingreso se realizó una ergometría al 37 por ciento de los pacientes, coronariografía al 32 por ciento, angioplastia coronaria al 9 por ciento y cirugía de revascularización al 4 por ciento. La variabilidad fue mínima en la administración de antiagregantes plaquetarios, importante en la de heparina y bloqueadores beta, y muy marcada en el uso de procedimientos de revascularización. La mortalidad y la incidencia de muerte o infarto fue del 2,6 y 4,4 por ciento durante la hospitalización, y del 4,6 y 8 por ciento a los 3 meses, con una amplia variabilidad interhospitalaria. Estas diferencias dejaron de ser significativas tras ajustar por las características clínicas y el tratamiento recibido en el momento del ingreso. Conclusiones. Los pacientes con síndrome coronario agudo sin elevación del segmento ST forman un grupo heterogéneo con una elevada incidencia de complicaciones y con una gran variabilidad interhospitalaria en su manejo terapéutico, tanto farmacológico como, sobre todo, invasivo. Estos resultados resaltan la importancia de la correcta estratificación inicial del riesgo y la homogeneización de su tratamiento, siguiendo las recomendaciones de las guías de práctica clínica (AU)