Cardiac rehabilitation makes a difference: lipid control targets and prognosis

Funding Acknowledgements None. Introduction Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) has become a fundamental element in the recovery of patients with acute coronary syndrome, since it achieves greater therapeutic adherence and better control of cardiovascular risk factors (CVRF). Purpose We aim to describe the characteristics of patients with ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (STEACS) included in a cardiac rehabilitation program, as well as the achievement of prevention objectives and the occurrence of mayor adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Methods We present a prospective registry of 664 patients admitted to a Coronary Unit with a diagnosis of STEACS during the years 2017-2020. They were classified according to their participation in a CR program. We compared history, lipid-lowering treatment (prior, at discharge and titration), lipid levels at discharge and at 1-year follow-up, and degree of compliance with lipid targets. MACE were observed at 2-year follow-up. Results From 664 patients, 351 were excluded due to lack of follow-up or early mortality. From a total of 313 patients (mean age 59.9±11.2 and 81% male), 55.3% were included in the CR program, with this group presenting a lower mean age (55.46±8.7 vs 65.39±11.5 p<0.001), as well as a higher frequency of a history of early ischemic heart disease and smoking, and a lower frequency of arterial hypertension and diabetes (Table). Lipid-lowering treatment at discharge was similar in both groups. In patients undergoing CR there was a lower level of total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLc) at one year (126.2±27 vs 137.2±34, p=0.002; 57.8±23 vs 67.5±26, p<0.001) compared to the group without CR. A greater reduction in LDLc (41.4% vs 0.86%, p<0.001) was achieved even from higher initial LDLc values. Titration of lipid-lowering treatment was also greater, with the old target of LDLc < 70 being achieved in a greater number of cases (81.5% vs 59.3%, p<0.001). At 1-year follow-up, the new cholesterol reduction target (LDL <55 or 50% reduction) was achieved in only 26.8% of patients, with a greater reduction being obtained in the CR group (34.1% vs 17.9%; p=0.02). At 2-year follow up, in CR group we found low rates of re-infarction (3.2% vs 4.1%), new revascularization (5.8% vs 7.3%), not statistically significant, but we could observe differences in mortality from all causes (0% vs 4.8%, p<0.01). Conclusions Participation in a CR program is associated with better lipid control in patients admitted for STEACS. These programs represent a basic tool for achieving increasingly demanding LDLc targets. Longer follow-up is needed to detect clinically important adverse events.