Impact of Lipoprotein(a) Levels on Cardiovascular Risk Estimation.

IF 3.1 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular Prevention Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-13 DOI:10.1007/s40292-024-00649-x
Walter Masson, Gabriel Waisman, Pablo Corral, Augusto Lavalle-Cobo, Melina Huerin, Leandro Barbagelata, Daniel Siniawski
{"title":"Impact of Lipoprotein(a) Levels on Cardiovascular Risk Estimation.","authors":"Walter Masson, Gabriel Waisman, Pablo Corral, Augusto Lavalle-Cobo, Melina Huerin, Leandro Barbagelata, Daniel Siniawski","doi":"10.1007/s40292-024-00649-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>A new cardiovascular risk (CVR) calculator that incorporates Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels has recently been designed.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To estimate CVR using the new score and to identify the reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) or systolic blood pressure (SBP) necessary to balance the risk attributable to Lp(a).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>CVR throughout life and at 10 years was estimated with the new score in patients in primary prevention, both considering and not considering the value of Lp(a). When the estimated risk considering Lp(a) levels exceeded the baseline risk, the reduction in LDL-C levels or SBP necessary to balance the risk attributable to Lp(a) was calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 671 patients (mean age 54.2 years, 47.2% women) were included. Globally, 22.7% of the population had high Lp(a) values (> 50 mg/dL or > 125 nmol/L). When calculating CVR throughout life and considering the Lp(a) value, the global risk increased in 66.7% of cases (median 19.3%). Similar results were observed when we assessed the 10-year risk. The risk associated with Lp(a) could be completely compensated by decreasing LDL-C (average 21 mg/dL) or SBP (average 6.3 mmHg) in 79.2% and 74.7% of cases, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>When calculating the CVR with the new score, two-thirds and one-third of the population were bidirectionally recategorized as 'up' or 'down,' respectively. The decrease in LDL-C or SBP mitigated the increased risk caused by Lp(a) levels across a substantial proportion of patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":12890,"journal":{"name":"High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular Prevention","volume":" ","pages":"381-388"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular Prevention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40292-024-00649-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: A new cardiovascular risk (CVR) calculator that incorporates Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels has recently been designed.

Aims: To estimate CVR using the new score and to identify the reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) or systolic blood pressure (SBP) necessary to balance the risk attributable to Lp(a).

Methods: CVR throughout life and at 10 years was estimated with the new score in patients in primary prevention, both considering and not considering the value of Lp(a). When the estimated risk considering Lp(a) levels exceeded the baseline risk, the reduction in LDL-C levels or SBP necessary to balance the risk attributable to Lp(a) was calculated.

Results: In total, 671 patients (mean age 54.2 years, 47.2% women) were included. Globally, 22.7% of the population had high Lp(a) values (> 50 mg/dL or > 125 nmol/L). When calculating CVR throughout life and considering the Lp(a) value, the global risk increased in 66.7% of cases (median 19.3%). Similar results were observed when we assessed the 10-year risk. The risk associated with Lp(a) could be completely compensated by decreasing LDL-C (average 21 mg/dL) or SBP (average 6.3 mmHg) in 79.2% and 74.7% of cases, respectively.

Conclusion: When calculating the CVR with the new score, two-thirds and one-third of the population were bidirectionally recategorized as 'up' or 'down,' respectively. The decrease in LDL-C or SBP mitigated the increased risk caused by Lp(a) levels across a substantial proportion of patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
脂蛋白(a)水平对心血管风险估计的影响。
导言:目的:使用新评分估算心血管风险(CVR),并确定平衡脂蛋白(a)风险所需的低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)或收缩压(SBP)降幅:在考虑和不考虑脂蛋白(a)值的情况下,采用新评分估算一级预防患者终生和 10 年后的心血管疾病风险。当考虑脂蛋白(a)水平的估计风险超过基线风险时,计算为平衡脂蛋白(a)引起的风险而必须降低的低密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平或血压:共纳入 671 名患者(平均年龄 54.2 岁,47.2% 为女性)。全球有 22.7% 的人脂蛋白(a)值较高(> 50 毫克/分升或> 125 毫摩尔/升)。在计算整个生命周期的心血管风险时,考虑到脂蛋白(a)值,66.7%的病例(中位数为 19.3%)的总体风险增加。当我们评估 10 年风险时,也观察到了类似的结果。分别有 79.2% 和 74.7% 的病例可以通过降低 LDL-C(平均 21 mg/dL)或 SBP(平均 6.3 mmHg)来完全补偿与 Lp(a) 相关的风险:结论:使用新评分计算 CVR 时,三分之二和三分之一的人群分别被双向重新归类为 "上升 "或 "下降"。低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(LDL-C)或血压(SBP)的降低减轻了相当一部分患者因脂蛋白(a)水平升高而增加的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
3.30%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: High Blood Pressure & Cardiovascular Prevention promotes knowledge, update and discussion in the field of hypertension and cardiovascular disease prevention, by providing a regular programme of independent review articles covering key aspects of the management of hypertension and cardiovascular diseases. The journal includes:   Invited ''State of the Art'' reviews.  Expert commentaries on guidelines, major trials, technical advances.Presentation of new intervention trials design.''Pros and Cons'' or round tables on controversial issues.Statements on guidelines from hypertension and cardiovascular scientific societies.Socio-economic issues.Cost/benefit in prevention of cardiovascular diseases.Monitoring of healthcare systems.News and views from the Italian Society of Hypertension (including abstracts).All manuscripts are subject to peer review by international experts. Letters to the editor are welcomed and will be considered for publication.
期刊最新文献
Juxtaposing Hypertension Guidelines: Are They Different? A Pragmatic Look to ESC and ESH Guidelines on (Arterial) Hypertension. Triple Therapy with Telmisartan, Amlodipine, and Rosuvastatin (TAR) Versus Telmisartan/Amlodipine (TA) and Telmisartan/Rosuvastatin (TR) Combinations in Hypertension and Dyslipidemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Blood Pressure Control and Clinical Outcomes After Renal Denervation Through Irrigated Catheter Radiofrequency Ablation in Patients with Resistant Hypertension: A Case Series with Up to 10 Years of Follow-Up. Evidence for a Role of Gut Microbiota and Probiotics in Aneurysmal Pathogenesis and Possible Therapeutics: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Screening for Atrial Fibrillation During Routine Automated Blood Pressure Measurement in General Population Aged 65 Years and Above: EMENO National Epidemiological Survey in Greece.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1