Abstract 266: Are Outpatient Cardiologists Asking about Peripheral Artery Disease Clinical Symptoms in Low and High Risk Patients in accordance with ACC/AHA Guidelines?

Author(s):  
Ankitkumar K Patel ◽  
Rajesh M Kabadi ◽  
Rajani Sharma ◽  
Rita Schmidt ◽  
Elias Iliadis

Background: Lower extremity peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a common syndrome that afflicts many individuals and leads to significant morbidity. The American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines for the Management of Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD) (JACC, 2006) outlines four clinical symptoms (claudication, walking impairment, exertional leg complaints and poorly healing wounds) that should be asked to at risk patients. Outpatient cardiology practices often take care of individuals at risk for PAD and have the opportunity to screen and improve quality of medical care in accordance with professional guidelines. Methods: A group of 367 outpatients seen in a large academic cardiology practice from September 2011 underwent chart review. Risk factors for PAD that were assessed include history of smoking, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, homocysteine levels, and CRP. Those that had three or more risk factors or a previous diagnosis of known PAD were classified as high risk and those with less than 2 risk factors were classified as low risk. Documentation of whether clinical symptoms were asked was obtained from outpatient chart. Fisher exact test was utilized for statistical analysis. Results: Fifty-seven percent (N=208) of our population were classified as high risk for PAD and forty-three percent (N=158) were low risk. Table 1 below shows assessment of clinical symptoms in high and low risk patients. Conclusions: Though both high risk and low risk PAD patients are assessed at equivalent rates for clinical symptoms, the vast majority of patients overall are underassessed. Lack of knowledge of clinical symptoms can lead to underscreening of PAD and thus undertreatment. Increasing clinical symptom screening in the outpatient cardiology setting can lead to quality improvement and adherence to ACC/AHA Guidelines.

Author(s):  
Rajesh M Kabadi ◽  
Ankitkumar Patel ◽  
Rajani Sharma ◽  
Rita Schmidt ◽  
Elias Iliadis

Background: Lower extremity peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a common syndrome that afflicts many individuals and leads to significant morbidity. Once appropriate at risk patients are identified, ankle-brachial index (ABI) testing is a relatively quick and inexpensive test that is recommended for proper assessment of PAD, per the recommendations outlined in the American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) Guidelines for the Management of Peripheral Artery Disease (PAD) (JACC, 2006). Outpatient cardiology practices often take care of individuals at risk for PAD and have the opportunity to test and appropriately treat this condition. Methods: A randomly selected group of 367 outpatients seen in a large academic cardiology practice from September 2011 underwent retrospective chart review. Risk factors for PAD that were assessed include history of smoking, hypertension, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, homocysteine levels, and CRP. Those that had three or more risk factors were classified as high risk and those with less than that were classified as low risk and frequency of ABI testing was evaluated. Fishers exact test was utilized for statistical analysis. Results: Fifty-one percent (N=187) of our population were classified as high risk for PAD, forty-three percent (N=158) were low risk, and six percent (N=22) were known to already have PAD. Amongst the high risk individuals, only six percent (N=12) had ABI testing performed while there were three percent (N=6) of low risk individuals that had this test (p=-0.34). Conclusions: There was no difference in ABI testing between high and low risk populations. Limitations of this study include lack of information regarding other diagnostic modalities that may have been used in place of ABI testing. Quality improvement may be achieved by increased use of such testing as this would allow for quicker identification of the disease, prompter treatment, and better outcomes, at a minimal cost.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adnan I Qureshi

Background and Purpose There is increasing recognition of a relatively high burden of pre-existing cardiovascular disease in Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID 19) infected patients. We determined the burden of pre-existing cardiovascular disease in persons residing in United States (US) who are at risk for severe COVID-19 infection. Methods Age (60 years or greater), presence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, mellitus, hypertension, and/or malignancy were used to identify persons at risk for admission to intensive care unit, or invasive ventilation, or death with COVID-19 infection. Persons were classified as low risk (no risk factors), moderate risk (1 risk factor), and high risk (two or more risk factors present) using nationally representative sample of US adults from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2017 and 2018 survey. Results Among a total of 5856 participants, 2386 (40.7%) were considered low risk, 1325 (22.6%) moderate risk, and 2145 persons (36.6%) as high risk for severe COVID-19 infection. The proportion of patients who had pre-existing stroke increased from 0.6% to 10.5% in low risk patients to high risk patients (odds ratio [OR]19.9, 95% confidence interval [CI]11.6-34.3). The proportion of who had pre-existing myocardial infection (MI) increased from 0.4% to 10.4% in low risk patients to high risk patients (OR 30.6, 95% CI 15.7-59.8). Conclusions A large proportion of persons in US who are at risk for developing severe COVID 19 infection are expected to have pre-existing cardiovascular disease. Further studies need to identify whether targeted strategies towards cardiovascular diseases can reduce the mortality in COVID-19 infected patients.


Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily R Cedarbaum ◽  
Yifei Ma ◽  
Rebecca Scherzer ◽  
Adaora A Adimora ◽  
Marcas Bamman ◽  
...  

Introduction: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is associated with decreased physical function and increased mortality in the general population. PAD is common in women with and at risk for HIV infection, but its association with functional decline is unclear. We examined the contribution of PAD to gait speed in the Women’s Interagency HIV Study, controlling for traditional cardiovascular risk factors and HIV-related factors. Methods: 1,839 participants (72% HIV+) with measured ankle-brachial index (ABI) and 4-meter gait speed were included in analysis. ABI scores were categorized as: <0.7, moderate-severe PAD; 0.7-<0.9, mild PAD; 0.9-<1.0, borderline PAD; 1.0-<1.1, low-normal; 1.1-1.4, normal. Longitudinal regression models with repeated measures were used to examine the association of PAD category with log-transformed gait speed after controlling for demographic, behavioral, and cardiovascular disease risk factors, and HIV and HCV status. Coefficients represented percentage differences. Results: Median age was 50 years, >70% were Black. Figure 1 shows median gait speed by PAD group. In univariate analysis, compared to normal ABI, each category of PAD severity was associated with slower gait speed: 6% slower for low-normal (95% confidence interval [CI]:4%, 9%), 10% for borderline (95% CI:6%, 13%), 14% for mild (95% CI:9%, 18%), and 16% for moderate-severe (95% CI:5%, 25%). In multivariate analysis, PAD severity remained associated with 6% (95% CI:4%, 9%), 10% (95%CI:7%, 14%), 12% (95%CI:8%, 17%), and 11% (95%CI: -1%, 22%) slower gait speed, respectively. HIV/HCV coinfection reduced gait speed by 9% (95%CI:4%, 14%). Among HIV+ women, neither CD4 count nor HIV viral load was associated with gait speed. Conclusions: In middle-aged women with and at risk for HIV, greater PAD severity is associated with progressively slower gait speed. ABI measurement may be a simple and clinically useful tool for early assessment of functional declines.


Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 141 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmi Tikkanen ◽  
Linda Mustelin ◽  
Viljami Aittomaki ◽  
Maria Kalimeri ◽  
Pekka Jousilahti ◽  
...  

Background: Coronary artery disease (CAD) and peripheral artery disease (PAD) share pathogenesis, but the evidence of metabolic risk factors underlying PAD risk is limited. We conducted detailed metabolic profiling of incident CAD and PAD to identify novel risk factors and clarify pathogenesis for these diseases. Methods: We measured circulating blood biomarkers using an NMR metabolomics in four large prospective studies from Finland (national FINRISK and Health 2000 studies, total n = 32,607). We used Cox proportional hazard modelling to estimate associations between biomarkers and incident CAD and PAD ( n events = 2010 and 464, respectively, during the median follow-up time of 14 years). Results: High VLDL-C increased the risk for CAD (HR=1.30, 95% CI 1.24-1.35 per SD-change), but not PAD (HR=1.09, 95% CI 0.99-1.21). Moreover, LDL-C and apolipoprotein B were only associated with CAD (HR=1.13, 95% CI 1.08-1.19; HR=1.29, 95% CI 1.23-1.35), whereas high triglycerides in LDL and VLDL increased the risk for both endpoints. Glycolysis-related metabolites (glucose, lactate, pyruvate and glycerol), amino acids (phenylalanine, alanine and glutamine) and inflammation biomarker glycoprotein acetyls (GlycA) showed stronger associations with PAD. Biomarker score showed stronger risk discrimination of high-risk individuals for incident PAD when compared to traditional CVD risk factors, suggesting that measuring these biomarkers could help to detect high-risk individuals better than currently used risk factors. Conclusions: We identified novel biomarkers for cardiovascular endpoints showed that the associations of these biomarkers were actually stronger for PAD compared to the CAD. Novel biomarkers could be used to guide the development of new therapies and improve the detection of high-risk individuals for these diseases. Figure. Associations between metabolic biomarkers and incident PAD and CAD.


2003 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 381-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Doweik ◽  
T. Maca ◽  
M. Schillinger ◽  
A. Budinsky ◽  
S. Sabeti ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol Volume 14 ◽  
pp. 401-408 ◽  
Author(s):  
Félicité Kamdem ◽  
Yacouba Mapoure ◽  
Ba Hamadou ◽  
Fanny Souksouna ◽  
Marie Solange Doualla ◽  
...  

Circulation ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 129 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
David M Kern ◽  
Sanjeev Balu ◽  
Ozgur Tunceli ◽  
Swetha Raparla ◽  
Deborah Anzalone

Introduction: This study aimed to compare the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with different risk factors for CHD as defined by NCEP ATP III guidelines. Methods: Dyslipidemia patients (≥1 medical claim for dyslipidemia, ≥1 pharmacy claim for a statin, or ≥1 LDL-C value ≥100 mg/dL [index date]) aged ≥18 y were identified from the HealthCore Integrated Research Environment from 1/1/2007-7/31/2012. Patients were classified as low risk (0 or 1 risk factor): hypertension, age ≥45 y [men] or ≥55 y [women], or low HDL-C), moderate/moderately high risk (≥2 risk factors), high risk (having CHD or CHD risk equivalent), or very high risk (having ACS or other established cardiovascular disease plus diabetes or metabolic syndrome). Demographics, comorbidities, medication use and lipid levels during the 12 months prior, and statin use during the 6 months post-index date were compared across risk groups (very high vs each other risk group). Results: There were 1,524,351 low-risk (mean age: 47 y; 45% men), 242,357 moderate-risk (mean age: 58 y; 59% men), 188,222 high-risk (mean age: 57 y; 52% men), and 57,469 very-high-risk (mean age: 63 y; 61% men) patients identified. Mean Deyo-Charlson comorbidity score differed greatly across risk strata: 0.20, 0.33, 1.26, and 2.22 from low to very high risk (p<.0001 for each). Compared with high-risk patients, very-high-risk patients had a higher rate of ischemic stroke: 5.4% vs 4.1%; peripheral artery disease: 17.1% vs 11.6%; coronary artery disease: 8.5% vs 8.2%; and abdominal aortic aneurysm: 2.3% vs 2.0% (p<.05 for each). Less than 1% of the total population had a prior prescription for each non-statin lipid-lowering medication (bile acid sequestrants, fibrates, ezetimibe, niacin, and omega-3). Very-high-risk patients had lower total cholesterol (very-high-risk mean: 194 mg/dL vs 207, 205, and 198 mg/dL for low-, moderate-/moderately-high-, and high-risk patients, respectively) and LDL-C (very-high-risk mean: 110 mg/dL vs 126, 126, and 116 mg/dL for the other risk groups; p<.0001 for each); higher triglycerides (TG) (very-high-risk mean: 206 mg/dL vs 123, 177, and 167 mg/dL for the other groups; p<.0001 for each); and lower HDL-C (very-high-risk mean: 45 mg/dL vs 57 [p<.0001], 45 [p=.006], and 51 mg/dL [p<.0001]). Statin use was low overall (15%), but higher in the very-high-risk group (45%) vs the high- (29%), moderate-/moderately-high- (18%), and low- (12%) risk groups (p<.0001 for each). Conclusions: Despite a large proportion of patients having high lipid levels, statin use after a dyslipidemia diagnosis was low: ≥80% of all patients (and more than half at very high risk) failed to receive a statin, indicating a potentially large population of patients who could benefit from statin treatment. Prior use of non-statin lipid-lowering medications was also low considering the high TG and low HDL-C levels among high-risk patients.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document