[Luces y sombras de la Guía Europea esc-2021 de Prevención de la Enfermedad Cardiovascular en la Práctica Clínica.] / Lights and shadows of the 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice.

General practitioners see in their consultation a a significant number of patients at high vascular risk (VR). The European Guidelines for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention (2021) recommend a new risk classification and intervention strategies on on vascular risk factors (RF), with the aim of providing a shared decision-making recommendations between professionals and patients. In this document we present a critical analysis of these guidelines, offering possible solutions that can be implemented in Primary Care. It should be noted that there are positive aspects (lights) such as that the SCORE2 (from forty to sixty-nine years) and SCORE2-OP models (from seventy to eighty-nine years) are based on more current cohorts and measure cardiovascular risk in a more accurately manner. In addition, it is proposed to differentiate different risk thresholds according to age-groups. For sake of practicality, cardiovascular risk can be estimated using different websites with the new computer models. However, among the negative aspects (shadows), it seems to be add complexity implementing nine subgroups of subjects according to their age or level of risk, with a defined thresholds that could cause a substantial increase in the potential number of subjects susceptible to treatment without a clear evidence that supports it. In addition, two-step RF interventions could delay achievement of therapeutic goals, especially in very high-risk patients, diabetics, or patients with cardiovascular disease. Given these limitations, in this document we propose practical recommendations in order to simplify and facilitate the implementation of the guideline in primary care.

Los médicos de familia atienden un importante número de pacientes con alto riesgo vascular (RV). Las Guías Europeas de Prevención Cardiovascular (2021) proponen una nueva clasificación del riesgo y estrategias de intervención sobre los factores de riesgo (FRV), orientada a la toma de decisiones compartidas entre profesionales y pacientes. En el presente trabajo realizamos un análisis crítico de dichas guías, ofreciendo posibles soluciones prácticas para la Atención Primaria. Son destacables aspectos positivos (luces) que los modelos de RV SCORE2 (entre cuarenta y sesenta y nueve años) y SCORE2-OP (entre setenta y ochenta y nueve años) se basan en cohortes más actuales y miden con mayor exactitud y discriminación dicho riesgo. Además, se propone actuar diferenciadamente sobre el riesgo según la edad. Pragmáticamente, se presentan nuevos modelos informáticos para calcular el riesgo. Sin embargo, entre los aspectos negativos (sombras), parece colegirse una mayor dificultad de implementación al proponerse nueve subgrupos de sujetos según su edad o nivel de riesgo, con un dintel definitorio de alto RV subjetivo que podría ocasionar un incremento sustancial en el número de sujetos susceptibles de tratar sin una discriminación objetiva que lo sustente. Además, las intervenciones sobre los FRV en dos pasos podrían retrasar la consecución de objetivos terapéuticos, sobre todo en pacientes de muy alto riesgo, diabéticos o con enfermedad cardiovascular. Ante las dificultades que plantea la valoración del riesgo, proponemos unificar criterios y simplificar los mensajes claves para hacer unas guías más atractivas y que realmente ayuden a los profesionales de Atención Primaria en su práctica habitual.

Prevalence Rates of Arterial Hypertension According to the Threshold Criteria of 140/90 or 130/80 mmHg and Associated Cardiometabolic and Renal Factors: SIMETAP-HTN Study.

Background and objectives: Arterial hypertension (HTN) is the leading preventable cause of atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases (ASCVD) and death from all causes. This study aimed to determine the prevalence rates of HTN diagnosed according to the threshold diagnostic criteria 130/80 mmHg and 140/90 mmHg, to compare blood pressure (BP) control, and to evaluate their associations with cardiovascular diseases and cardiometabolic and renal risk factors. Materials and Methods: This was a cross-sectional observational study conducted in primary care with a population-based random sample: 6588 people aged 18.0-102.8 years. Crude and adjusted prevalence rates of HTN were calculated. BP control was compared in HTN patients with and without ASCVD or chronic kidney disease (CKD). Their associations with cardiovascular diseases and cardiometabolic and renal factors were assessed using bivariate and multivariate analysis. Results: Adjusted prevalence rates of HTN diagnosed according to 140/90 and 130/90 criteria were 30.9% (32.9% male; 29.7% female) and 54.9% (63.2% male; 49.3% female), respectively. BP < 130/80 mmHg was achieved in 60.5% of HTN patients without ASCVD or CKD according to 140/90 criterion, and 65.5% according to 130/80 criterion. This BP-control was achieved in 70% of HTN patients with ASCVD and 71% with CKD, according to both criteria. Coronary heart disease (CHD), heart failure, atrial fibrillation, stroke, diabetes, prediabetes, low glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), hyperuricemia, hypercholesterolemia, obesity, overweight, and increased waist-to-height ratio were independently associated with HTN according to both criteria. Conclusions: Almost a third of the adult population has HTN according to the 140/90 criterion, and more than half according to the 130/90 criterion, with a higher prevalence in men. The main clinical conditions associated with HTN were heart failure, diabetes, CHD, low eGFR, and obesity.

Luces y sombras de la Guía Europea ESC-2021 de Prevención de la Enfermedad Cardiovascular en la Práctica Clínica / Lights and shadows of the 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice

Los médicos de familia atienden un importante número de pacientes con alto riesgo vascular (RV). LasGuías Europeas de Prevención Cardio-vascular (2021) proponen una nueva clasificación del riesgo y estrategias de intervención sobre los factores de riesgo (FRV), orientada a la tomade decisiones compartidas entre profesionales y pacientes. En el presente trabajo realizamos un análisis crítico de dichas guías, ofreciendoposibles soluciones prácticas para la Atención Primaria.Son destacables aspectos positivos (luces) que los modelos de RV SCORE2 (entre cuarenta y sesenta y nueve años) y SCORE2-OP (entre setenta yochenta y nueve años) se basan en cohortes más actuales y miden con mayor exactitud y discriminación dicho riesgo. Además, se propone actuardiferenciadamente sobre el riesgo según la edad. Pragmáticamente, se presentan nuevos modelos informáticos para calcular el riesgo. Sin embargo,entre los aspectos negativos (sombras), parece colegirse una mayor dificultad de implementación al proponerse nueve subgrupos de sujetos segúnsu edad o nivel de riesgo, con un dintel definitorio de alto RV subjetivo que podría ocasionar un incremento sustancial en el número de sujetossusceptibles de tratar sin una discriminación objetiva que lo sustente. Además, las intervenciones sobre los FRV en dos pasos podrían retrasar laconsecución de objetivos terapéuticos, sobre todo en pacientes de muy alto riesgo, diabéticos o con enfermedad cardiovascular.Ante las dificultades que plantea la valoración del riesgo, proponemos unificar criterios y simplificar los mensajes claves para hacer unas guíasmás atractivas y que realmente ayuden a los profesionales de Atención Primaria en su práctica habitual.(AU)

General practitioners see in their consultation a a significant number of patients at high vascular risk (VR). The European Guidelines forCardiovascular Disease Prevention (2021) recommend a new risk classification and intervention strategies on on vascular risk factors (RF), withthe aim of providing a shared decision-making recommendations between professionals and patients. In this document we present a criticalanalysis of these guidelines, offering possible solutions that can be implemented in Primary Care.It should be noted that there are positive aspects (lights) such as that the SCORE2 (from forty to sixty-nine years) and SCORE2-OP models (fromseventy to eighty-nine years) are based on more current cohorts and measure cardiovascular risk in a more accurately manner. In addition, it isproposed to differentiate different risk thresholds according to age-groups. For sake of practicality, cardiovascular risk can be estimated usingdifferent websites with the new computer models. However, among the negative aspects (shadows), it seems to be add complexity implemen-ting nine subgroups of subjects according to their age or level of risk, with a defined thresholds that could cause a substantial increase in thepotential number of subjects susceptible to treatment without a clear evidence that supports it. In addition, two-step RF interventions coulddelay achievement of therapeutic goals, especially in very high-risk patients, diabetics, or patients with cardiovascular disease.Given these limitations, in this document we propose practical recommendations in order to simplify and facilitate the implementation of theguideline in primary care.(AU)

Elevated pulse pressure and cardiovascular risk associated in Spanish population attended in primary care: IBERICAN study.

Introduction: Elevated pulse pressure (ePP) is an independent marker of cardiovascular risk (CVR) in people older than 60, and a functional marker of subclinical target organ damage (sTOD) which can predict cardiovascular events in patients with hypertension (HTN), regardless of sTOD. Objective: To evaluate the prevalence of ePP in adult population seen in primary care and its association with other vascular risk factors, sTOD and with cardiovascular disease (CVD). Materials and methods: Observational multicentre study conducted in Spain (8,066 patients, 54.5% women) from the prospective cohort study IBERICAN recruited in Primary Care. Pulse pressure (PP) was defined as the difference between the systolic blood pressure (SBP) and the diastolic blood pressure (DBP) ≥60 mmHg. Adjusted (for age and sex) ePP prevalence were determined. Bivariate and multivariate analyses of the possible variables associated with ePP were carried out. Results: The mean of PP was 52.35 mmHg, and was significantly higher (p < 0.001) in patients with HTN (56.58 vs. 48.45 mmHg) The prevalence of ePP adjusted for age and sex was 23.54% (25.40% men vs. 21.75% women; p < 0.0001). The ePP prevalence rates increased linearly with age (R2 = 0.979) and were significantly more frequent in population aged ≥65 than in population aged <65 (45.47% vs. 20.98%; p < 0.001). HTN, left ventricular hypertrophy, low estimated glomerular filtration rate, alcohol consumption, abdominal obesity, and CVD were independently associated with ePP. 66.27% of patients with ePP had a high or very high CVR, as compared with 36.57% of patients without ePP (OR: 3.41 [95% CI 3.08-3.77]). Conclusions: The ePP was present in a quarter of our sample, and it was increased with the age. Also, the ePP was more frequent in men, patients with HTN, other TOD (as left ventricular hypertrophy or low estimated glomerular filtration rate) and CVD; because of this, the ePP was associated a higher cardiovascular risk. In our opinion, the ePP is an importer risk marker and its early identification lets to improve better diagnostic and therapeutic management.