Abstract P431: ASSOCIATION OF LIPOPROTEIN(A) WITH CARDIOVASCULAR EVENTS IN YOUNG NON-FAMILIAL HYPERCHOLESTEROLEMIA

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 141 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Pao-Hsien Chu

Background and aims: Elevated lipoprotein(a) is an independent risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease especially in familial hypercholesterolemia. The association of elevated lipoprotein(a) within non-familial hypercholesterolemia or healthy population however, is not known. Therefore, we investigated the associations between elevated lipoprotein(a) and the risk of cardiovascular disease in a non-familial hypercholesterolemia clinically healthy young age cohort. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we reviewed medical records of 3,427 participants with lipoprotein(a) levels from a tertiary healthcare center in Taiwan. We further classified lipoprotein(a) level into four groups and analyzed cardiovascular events. Results: Our study population had a mean age 46 years old that were 78% male. Mean total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein level were 195 mg/dL and 118 mg/dL respectively. Overall, 12.9% of the participants had an elevated lipoprotein(a) level (>30 mg/dL), and 2.7% had a very high level (>70 mg/dL). Thirty-three events including 6 participants with stroke and 27 with coronary artery disease were identified. A lipoprotein(a) level >70 mg/dL was associated with a higher risk of coronary artery disease events in Kaplan-Meier analysis. Aging was associated with a higher lipoprotein(a) value in the male participants but not in the female participants. However, the severity of fatty liver was not positively associated with lipoprotein(a) value. Conclusions: Elevated lipoprotein(a) was associated with coronary events but not the severity of fatty liver disease in non-familial hypercholesterolemia clinically healthy population. Aging may be associated with a higher lipoprotein(a) level in males but not females.

Diabetes ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 70 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 381-P
Author(s):  
ARTHUR MADER ◽  
MAXIMILIAN MAECHLER ◽  
BARBARA LARCHER ◽  
LUKAS SPRENGER ◽  
BEATRIX MUTSCHLECHNER ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Kazuomi Kario ◽  
Satoshi Hoshide ◽  
Keisuke Narita ◽  
Yukie Okawara ◽  
Hiroshi Kanegae ◽  
...  

Resistant hypertension is an important cardiovascular risk factor. This analysis of the JAMP study (Japan Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring Prospective) data investigated the effects of uncontrolled resistant hypertension diagnosed using ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring on the risk of heart failure (HF) and overall cardiovascular events. The JAMP study patients with hypertension and no HF history were included. They had true resistant hypertension (24-hour BP ≥130/80 mm Hg), pseudoresistant hypertension (24-hour BP <130/80 mm Hg), well-controlled nonresistant hypertension (24-hour BP <130/80 mm Hg), or uncontrolled nonresistant hypertension (24-hour BP ≥130/80 mm Hg). The primary end point was total cardiovascular events, including atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (fatal/nonfatal stroke and fatal/nonfatal coronary artery disease), and HF. During 4.5±2.4 years of follow-up the overall incidence per 1000 person-years was 10.1 for total cardiovascular disease, 4.1 for stroke, 3.5 for coronary artery disease, and 2.6 for HF. The adjusted risk of total cardiovascular and HF events was significantly increased in patients with true resistant versus controlled nonresistant hypertension (hazard ratio, 1.66 [95% CI, 1.12–2.48]; P =0.012 and 2.24 [95% CI, 1.17–4.30]; P =0.015, respectively) and versus uncontrolled nonresistant hypertension (1.51 [1.03–2.20]; P =0.034 and 3.03 [1.58–5.83]; P <0.001, respectively). The findings were robust in a sensitivity analysis using a slightly different definition of resistant hypertension. True resistant hypertension diagnosed using ambulatory BP monitoring is a significant independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease events, especially for HF. This highlights the importance of diagnosing and effectively treating resistant hypertension. Registration: URL: https://www.umin.ac.jp/ctr ; Unique identifier: UMIN000020377.


2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 621-625 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felice Gragnano ◽  
Fabio Fimiani ◽  
Marco Di Maio ◽  
Arturo Cesaro ◽  
Giuseppe Limongelli ◽  
...  

1998 ◽  
Vol 44 (8) ◽  
pp. 1827-1832 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ishwarlal Jialal

Abstract Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in Westernized populations. Evolving lipoprotein risk factors include LDL oxidation and lipoprotein(a) [lp(a)]. Several lines of evidence support a role for oxidatively modified LDL in atherogenesis and its in vivo existence. There are both direct and indirect measures of oxidative stress. The most relevant direct measure of lipid peroxidation is urinary F2 isoprostanes. The most common indirect measure of LDL oxidation is quantifying the lag phase of copper-catalyzed LDL oxidation by assaying conjugated diene formation. Lp(a) is increased in patients with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease. However, not all prospective studies have confirmed a positive relationship between Lp(a) and cardiovascular events. Lp(a) appears to present three major problems: standardization of the assay, establishing its role in atherogenesis, and the lack of an effective therapy that can substantially lower Lp(a) concentrations. Thus, at the present time, Lp(a) concentrations should not be recommended for the general population but be reserved for patients with coronary artery disease without established risk factors, young patients with coronary artery disease or cerebrovascular disease, or a family history of premature atherosclerosis and family members of an index patient with increased concentrations of Lp(a). Although both LDL oxidation and Lp(a) are evolving risk factors for cardiovascular disease, more data are needed before they become part of the established lipoprotein repertoire.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 4687-4687
Author(s):  
Kamila Izabela Cisak ◽  
Jianmin Pan ◽  
Shesh Nath Rai ◽  
Patricia Ashby ◽  
Vivek R. Sharma

Abstract Introduction Hemophilia A and B are genetic disorders characterized by deficiency of clotting factors resulting in delayed bleeding. Despite hypocoagulable state, patients with hemophilia are prone to developing coronary artery disease or its equivalents. It is known that proper treatment of dyslipidemia has relevant impact of atherosclerotic cardiovascular events reduction. The goal of our study was to determine implementation of newest 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol in our patients with hemophilia and assess how many more patients currently may require lipid-lowering therapy. Methods We performed retrospective chart review of patients followed at single hemophilia treatment center in United States. We included 30 patients with factor VIII or IX deficiency, age 30 and older, followed in clinic between 2005 and 2014 with available lipid profile results. Patients with acquired hemophilia were excluded from study. We used stepwise approach proposed by above guidelines and divided patients into four groups. Results 4 patients among 30 were already on lipid lowering therapy. 1 (3.3%) additional patient [95% CI 0.001-0.17] required lipid lowering therapy due to presence of clinical atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (group 1), 0 patients had LDL-C at least 190 mg/dl (group 2), 2 (6.7%) additional patients [95% CI 0.008-0.21] required therapy due to presence of diabetes mellitus and 40 to 75 year of age and LDL-C levels of 70 to 189 mg/dl (group 3); 9 (30%) additional patients [95% CI 0.17-0.51] should receive therapy due to age 40 to 75 and estimated 10-year ASCVD risk above 7.5%. We had total 12 (40%) additional patients among 30 with known lipid profile who were not on lipid lowering therapy but who require such therapy based on the latest 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol. Conclusion Aggressive cardiovascular risk factor modifications play a significant role in prevention of coronary artery disease, stroke and peripheral vascular disease. This may be even more relevant in patients with hemophilia who have an increased baseline risk of bleeding and may therefore be at greater risk of complications from anti-thrombotic therapies used for treating cardiovascular disease. Above results suggest that according to actual 2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol, a significant number of patients with hemophilia may require lipid lowering therapy. It is important for hemophilia treatment centers to screen their patients with regard to this since many of them may either not have primary care physicians or may not be perceived as having high risk for cardiovascular disease due to their bleeding disorder. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Karrthik ◽  
M Gad ◽  
N Bazarbashi ◽  
K Ahuja ◽  
Y Sammour ◽  
...  

Abstract Background High lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] levels have been shown to increase Myocardial Infarction (MI) and all-cause mortality. However, studies evaluating the optimal preventive measures for that subset of cardiac patients are scarce. This study aims to study the outcomes of aspirin use versus no aspirin for the prevention of all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction in patients with high Lp(a) levels. Purpose We sought to determine the effect of Aspirin in reducing the rate of MI and all-cause mortality among patients with high lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a) ≥50mg/dL] Methods Patients who attended the preventive cardiology clinic from 2005 to 2016 and included in the Preventive Cardiology Database were included in the current single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study that was conducted according to the guidelines of the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology Statement) checklist. The primary outcome was the incidence of myocardial infarction and the secondary outcome was all-cause mortality. Patients were excluded in cases of I) Lp(a)a <50mg/dL, II) history of malignancy, or III) being on anticoagulation/ dual antiplatelet therapy. The median duration of follow-up was 92 months from time of Lp(a) measurement to the last follow-up. Continuous variables were expressed as means ± standard deviation or median (IQR), and categorical variables were expressed as percentages (%). All statistical tests were two-sided. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed with 1:1 nearest match for Age, Gender, Race, Smoking status, BMI, Diabetes, Peripheral artery disease, Carotid artery disease, coronary artery disease, chronic kidney disease, Heart failure, Hypertension, Dyslipidemia, Stroke, family history of coronary artery disease, Lp (a), LDL, HDL, Triglycerides, glucose and total cholesterol. Results 1,805 patients fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria out of 7,410 patients initially identified with recorded Lp(a) levels in the Preventive Cardiology Database. Of these, 376 patients were taking aspirin, and 1429 patients were not receiving aspirin. After propensity score matching for different baseline characteristics and comorbidities as mentioned above, 316 patients were matched in each group. Patients who were on Aspirin had a significantly lower rate of MI events compared to patients who were not on aspirin (6.96% vs 12.02%, P=0.03) and a lower rate, however statistically non-significant, of all-cause mortality (2.84% vs 4.11%, P=0.385). Conclusion The use of aspirin in patients with elevated Lp(a) levels significantly lowers the rate of myocardial infarction events. Larger randomized clinical trials are warranted to evaluate the use of aspirin for primary and secondary prevention of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with high Lp(a) levels.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document