47
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Prevention of cardiovascular disease guided by total risk estimations − challenges and opportunities for practical implementation: highlights of a CardioVascular Clinical Trialists (CVCT) Workshop of the ESC Working Group on CardioVascular Pharmacology and Drug Therapy

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This paper presents a summary of the potential practical and economic barriers to implementation of primary prevention of cardiovascular disease guided by total cardiovascular risk estimations in the general population. It also reviews various possible solutions to overcome these barriers. The report is based on discussion among experts in the area at a special CardioVascular Clinical Trialists workshop organized by the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Cardiovascular Pharmacology and Drug Therapy that took place in September 2009. It includes a review of the evidence in favour of the ‘treat-to-target’ paradigm, as well as potential difficulties with this approach, including the multiple pathological processes present in high-risk patients that may not be adequately addressed by this strategy. The risk-guided therapy approach requires careful definitions of cardiovascular risk and consideration of clinical endpoints as well as the differences between trial and ‘real-world’ populations. Cost-effectiveness presents another issue in scenarios of finite healthcare resources, as does the difficulty of documenting guideline uptake and effectiveness in the primary care setting, where early modification of risk factors may be more beneficial than later attempts to manage established disease. The key to guideline implementation is to improve the quality of risk assessment and demonstrate the association between risk factors, intervention, and reduced event rates. In the future, this may be made possible by means of automated data entry and various other measures. In conclusion, opportunities exist to increase guideline implementation in the primary care setting, with potential benefits for both the general population and healthcare resources.

          Related collections

          Most cited references42

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          2010 ACCF/AHA guideline for assessment of cardiovascular risk in asymptomatic adults: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Efficacy of perindopril in reduction of cardiovascular events among patients with stable coronary artery disease: randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial (the EUROPA study).

            K. Fox (2003)
            Treatment with angiotensin-converting-enzyme (ACE) inhibitors reduces the rate of cardiovascular events among patients with left-ventricular dysfunction and those at high risk of such events. We assessed whether the ACE inhibitor perindopril reduced cardiovascular risk in a low-risk population with stable coronary heart disease and no apparent heart failure. We recruited patients from October, 1997, to June, 2000. 13655 patients were registered with previous myocardial infarction (64%), angiographic evidence of coronary artery disease (61%), coronary revascularisation (55%), or a positive stress test only (5%). After a run-in period of 4 weeks, in which all patients received perindopril, 12218 patients were randomly assigned perindopril 8 mg once daily (n=6110), or matching placebo (n=6108). The mean follow-up was 4.2 years, and the primary endpoint was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or cardiac arrest. Analysis was by intention to treat. Mean age of patients was 60 years (SD 9), 85% were male, 92% were taking platelet inhibitors, 62% beta blockers, and 58% lipid-lowering therapy. 603 (10%) placebo and 488 (8%) perindopril patients experienced the primary endpoint, which yields a 20% relative risk reduction (95% CI 9-29, p=0.0003) with perindopril. These benefits were consistent in all predefined subgroups and secondary endpoints. Perindopril was well tolerated. Among patients with stable coronary heart disease without apparent heart failure, perindopril can significantly improve outcome. About 50 patients need to be treated for a period of 4 years to prevent one major cardiovascular event. Treatment with perindopril, on top of other preventive medications, should be considered in all patients with coronary heart disease.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Differences in prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension between developing and developed countries.

              Objective To systematically review quantitative differences in the prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension between developed and developing countries over the past 6 years. Methods We searched Medline [prevalence AND awareness AND treatment AND control AND (hypertension OR high blood pressure)] for population-based surveys. Prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension were compared between men and women, and between developing and developed countries, adjusting for age. The proportions of awareness, treatment and control were defined relative to the total number of hypertensive patients. Results We identified 248 articles, of which 204 did not fulfill inclusion criteria. The remaining articles reported data from 35 countries. Among men, the mean prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension were 32.2, 40.6, 29.2 and 9.8%, respectively, in developing countries and 40.8, 49.2, 29.1 and 10.8%, respectively, in developed countries. Among women, the mean prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension were 30.5, 52.7, 40.5, and 16.2%, respectively, in developing countries and 33.0, 61.7, 40.6 and 17.3%, respectively, in developed countries. After adjusting for age, the prevalence of hypertension among men was lower in developing than in developed countries (difference, S6.5%; 95% confidence interval, S11.3 to S1.8%). Conclusion There were no significant differences in mean prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension between developed and developing countries, except for a higher prevalence among men in developed countries. The prevalence, awareness, treatment and control of hypertension in developing countries are coming closer to those in developed countries.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Eur J Prev Cardiol
                Eur J Prev Cardiol
                CPR
                spcpr
                European Journal of Preventive Cardiology
                SAGE Publications (Sage UK: London, England )
                2047-4873
                2047-4881
                December 2012
                December 2012
                : 19
                : 6
                : 1454-1464
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institut Lorrain du Coeur et des Vaisseaux, Vandoeuvre, France.
                [2 ]Pasteur Institute, Lille, France.
                [3 ]City Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
                [4 ]12 de Octubre Hospital, Madrid, Spain.
                [5 ]University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
                [6 ]Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
                [7 ]Adelaide and Meath Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
                [8 ]Frankfurt University, Frankfurt, Germany.
                [9 ]University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
                [10 ]Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, USA.
                [11 ]University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia.
                [12 ]University of Ulm Medical School, Ulm, Germany.
                Author notes
                [*]Faiez Zannad, Centre d’investigation Clinique, Institut Lorrain du Coeur et des Vaisseaux, CHU Brabois, 54500 Vandoeuvre, France Email: f.zannad@ 123456chu-nancy.fr
                Article
                10.1177_1741826711424873
                10.1177/1741826711424873
                3573669
                23310961
                2251dbc9-d856-42d1-a5f9-613185a6d9a0
                © The European Society of Cardiology 2011 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 29 June 2011
                : 7 September 2011
                Categories
                Risk Prediction
                Review

                cardiovascular disease,primary prevention,risk-guided therapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article