2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Grundy SM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7403606 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines.
Grundy Scott M SM Stone Neil J NJ Bailey Alison L AL Beam Craig C Birtcher Kim K KK Blumenthal Roger S RS Braun Lynne T LT de Ferranti Sarah S Faiella-Tommasino Joseph J Forman Daniel E DE Goldberg Ronald R Heidenreich Paul A PA Hlatky Mark A MA Jones Daniel W DW Lloyd-Jones Donald D Lopez-Pajares Nuria N Ndumele Chiadi E CE Orringer Carl E CE Peralta Carmen A CA Saseen Joseph J JJ Smith Sidney C SC Sperling Laurence L Virani Salim S SS Yeboah Joseph J
Circulation 20181110 25
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectiveTo review the literature systematically and perform meta-analyses to address these questions: 1) Is there evidence that self-measured blood pressure (BP) without other augmentation is superior to office-based measurement of BP for achieving better BP control or for preventing adverse clinical outcomes that are related to elevated BP? 2) What is the optimal target for BP lowering during antihypertensive therapy in adults? 3) In adults with hypertension, how do various antihypertensive drug classes differ in their benefits and harms compared with each other as first-line therapy?MethodsElectronic literature searches were performed by Doctor Evidence, a global medical evidence software and services company, across PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 to 2015 using key words and relevant subject headings for randomized controlled trials that met eligibility criteria defined for each question. We performed analyses using traditional frequentist statistical and Bayesian approaches, including random-effects Bayesian network meta-analyses.ResultsOur results suggest that: 1) There is a modest but significant improvement in systolic BP in randomized controlled trials of self-measured BP versus usual care at 6 but not 12 months, and for selected patients and their providers self-measured BP may be a helpful adjunct to routine office care. 2) systolic BP lowering to a target of <130 mm Hg may reduce the risk of several important outcomes including risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and major cardiovascular events. No class of medications (i.e., angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers, or beta blockers) was significantly better than thiazides and thiazide-like diuretics as a first-line therapy for any outcome.
| S-EPMC8654280 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The American College of Cardiology (ACC) Foundation, along with key specialty and subspecialty societies, conducted an appropriate use review of stress testing and anatomic diagnostic procedures for risk assessment and evaluation of known or suspected chronic coronary disease (CCD), formerly referred to as stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). This document reflects an updating of the prior Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) published for radionuclide imaging, stress echocardiography (echo), calcium scoring, coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA), stress cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), and invasive coronary angiography for SIHD. This is in keeping with the commitment to revise and refine the AUC on a frequent basis. As with the prior version of this document, rating of test modalities is provided side-by-side for a given clinical scenario. These ratings are explicitly not considered competitive rankings due to the limited availability of comparative evidence, patient variability, and the range of capabilities available in any given local setting1-4.This version of the AUC for CCD is a focused update of the prior version of the AUC for SIHD4. Key changes beyond the updated ratings based on new evidence include the following: 1. Clinical scenarios related to preoperative testing were removed and will be incorporated into another AUC document under development. 2. Some clinical scenarios and tables were removed in an effort to simplify the selection of clinical scenarios. Additionally, the flowchart of tables has been reorganized, and all clinical scenario tables can now be reached by answering a limited number of clinical questions about the patient, starting with the patient's symptom status. 3. Several clinical scenarios have been revised to incorporate changes in other documents such as pretest probability assessment, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk assessment, syncope, and others. ASCVD risk factors that are not accounted for in contemporary risk calculators have been added as modifiers to certain clinical scenarios. The 64 clinical scenarios rated in this document are limited to the detection and risk assessment of CCD and were drawn from common applications or anticipated uses, as well as from current clinical practice guidelines.5 These clinical scenarios do not specifically address patients having acute chest pain episodes. They may, however, be applicable in the inpatient setting if the patient is not having an acute coronary syndrome and warrants evaluation for CCD.Using standardized methodology, clinical scenarios were developed to describe common patient encounters in clinical practice focused on common applications and anticipated uses of testing for CCD. Where appropriate, the scenarios were developed on the basis of the most current ACC/American Heart Association guidelines. A separate, independent rating panel scored the clinical scenarios in this document on a scale of 1 to 9, following a modified Delphi process consistent with the recently updated AUC development methodology. Scores of 7 to 9 indicate that a modality is considered appropriate for the clinical scenario presented, midrange scores of 4 to 6 indicate that a modality may be appropriate for the clinical scenario, and scores of 1 to 3 indicate that a modality is rarely appropriate.
| S-EPMC10585920 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Statin coverage has been examined among HIV-infected patients using Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP III) and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines, although not with newer National Lipid Association (NLA) guidelines. We investigated statin eligibility, prescribing practices, and therapeutic responses using these three guidelines. Sociodemographic, clinical, and laboratory data were collected between 2011 and 2016 for HIV-infected outpatients enrolled in the DC Cohort, a multi-center, prospective, observational study in Washington, DC. This analysis included patients aged ≥21 years receiving primary care at their HIV clinic site with ≥1 cholesterol result available. Of 3312 patients (median age 52; 79% black), 52% were eligible for statins based on ≥1 guideline, including 45% (NLA), 40% (ACC/AHA), and 30% (ATP III). Using each guideline, 49% (NLA), 56% (ACC/AHA), and 73% (ATP III) of eligible patients were prescribed statins. Predictors of new prescriptions included older age (aHR = 1.16 [1.08-1.26]/5 years), body mass index ≥30 (aHR = 1.50 [1.07-2.11]), and diabetes (aHR = 1.35 [1.03-1.79]). Hepatitis C coinfection was inversely associated with statin prescriptions (aHR = 0.67 [0.45-1.00]). Among 216 patients with available cholesterol results pre-/post-prescription, 53% achieved their NLA cholesterol goal after 6 months. Hepatitis C coinfection was positively associated (aHR = 1.87 [1.06-3.32]), and depression (aHR = 0.56 [0.35-0.92]) and protease inhibitor use (aHR = 0.61 [0.40-0.93]) were inversely associated, with NLA goal achievement. Half of patients were eligible for statins based on current US guidelines, with the highest proportion eligible based on NLA guidelines, yet, fewer received prescriptions and achieved treatment goals. Greater compliance with recommended statin prescribing practices may reduce cardiovascular disease risk among HIV-infected individuals.
| S-EPMC5808384 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Studies have demonstrated that the current US guidelines based on American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) Pooled Cohort Equations Risk Calculator may underestimate risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease ( CVD ) in certain high-risk individuals, therefore missing opportunities for intensive therapy and preventing CVD events. Similarly, the guidelines may overestimate risk in low risk populations resulting in unnecessary statin therapy. We used Machine Learning ( ML ) to tackle this problem. Methods and Results We developed a ML Risk Calculator based on Support Vector Machines ( SVM s) using a 13-year follow up data set from MESA (the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) of 6459 participants who were atherosclerotic CVD-free at baseline. We provided identical input to both risk calculators and compared their performance. We then used the FLEMENGHO study (the Flemish Study of Environment, Genes and Health Outcomes) to validate the model in an external cohort. ACC / AHA Risk Calculator, based on 7.5% 10-year risk threshold, recommended statin to 46.0%. Despite this high proportion, 23.8% of the 480 "Hard CVD " events occurred in those not recommended statin, resulting in sensitivity 0.76, specificity 0.56, and AUC 0.71. In contrast, ML Risk Calculator recommended only 11.4% to take statin, and only 14.4% of "Hard CVD " events occurred in those not recommended statin, resulting in sensitivity 0.86, specificity 0.95, and AUC 0.92. Similar results were found for prediction of "All CVD " events. Conclusions The ML Risk Calculator outperformed the ACC/AHA Risk Calculator by recommending less drug therapy, yet missing fewer events. Additional studies are underway to validate the ML model in other cohorts and to explore its ability in short-term CVD risk prediction.
| S-EPMC6404456 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) blood pressure (BP) guideline provides updated recommendations for antihypertensive medication initiation and intensification.ObjectivesDetermine the risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) events among adults recommended and not recommended antihypertensive medication initiation or intensification by the 2017 ACC/AHA BP guideline.MethodsThe authors analyzed data for black and white REGARDS (REasons for Geographic And Racial Differences in Stroke) study participants (age ≥45 years). Systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) were measured twice at baseline (2003 to 2007) and averaged. Participants not taking (n = 14,039) and taking (n = 15,179) antihypertensive medication were categorized according to their recommendations for antihypertensive medication initiation and intensification by the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline. Overall, 4,094 CVD events (stroke, coronary heart disease, and heart failure) occurred by December 31, 2014.ResultsAmong participants not taking antihypertensive medication, 34.4% were recommended pharmacological antihypertensive treatment initiation. The CVD event rate per 1,000 person-years among participants recommended antihypertensive medication initiation with SBP/DBP ≥140/90 mm Hg was 22.7 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.3 to 25.0). Among participants with SBP/DBP 130 to 139/80 to 89 mm Hg, the CVD event rate was 20.5 (95% CI: 18.5 to 22.6) and 3.4 (95% CI: 2.4 to 4.4) for those recommended and not recommended antihypertensive medication initiation, respectively. Among participants taking antihypertensive medication, 62.8% were recommended treatment intensification. The CVD event rate per 1,000 person-years among participants recommended treatment intensification was 33.6 (95% CI: 31.5 to 35.6) and 22.4 (95% CI: 20.8 to 23.9) for those with SBP/DBP ≥140/90 mm Hg and 130 to 139/80 to 89 mm Hg, respectively.ConclusionsImplementing the 2017 ACC/AHA guideline would direct antihypertensive medication initiation and intensification to adults with high CVD risk.
| S-EPMC6346270 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe study aims to examine the extent to which the updated ACC/AHA management of blood cholesterol guideline (2018) is implemented in practice and to assess the value of the clinical pharmacist interventions in improving physicians' adherence the guidelines recommendations.MethodsWe utilized in this study an interventional before-after design. The study was conducted on 272 adult patients who visited the study site internal medicine clinics and were candidates for statin therapy based on the 2018 ACC/AHA guidelines for cholesterol management. Adherence to guideline recommendations was measured before and after clinical pharmacists' interventions by calculating the percentage of patients receiving statin therapy as per guideline recommendation, the type and intensity (moderate or high intensity) of statin therapy used, and the need for additional non-statin therapy.ResultsAdherence with guideline recommendations was significantly improved from 60.3% to 92.6% (X2 = 79.1, p = 0.0001) after clinical pharmacist interventions. Among patients who were on statin therapy, the percentage of those who were on proper statin intensity increased significantly from 47.6% to 94.4% (X2 = 72.5, p = 0.0001). The combination of statins with non-statin therapies such as ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors increased from 8.5% to 30.6% (X2 = 95, p<0.0001) and from 0.0% to 1.6% (X2 = 6, p = 0.014), respectively. The use of other lipid-lowering agents was diminished from 14.6% to 3.2% (X2 = 19.2, p<0.0001).ConclusionCollaboration between physicians and clinical pharmacists is a crucial strategy to improve patients' treatment and hence, achieve better health outcomes among patients suffering from dyslipidemia.
| S-EPMC10042341 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7685565 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7734661 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) is the leading cause of death worldwide and the management of blood cholesterol is a cornerstone of medical therapy for the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Patients with diabetes represent an important high-risk group in whom clinicians should advocate the use of statins and lifestyle modification for the reduction of ASCVD. The recent 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines on managing blood cholesterol provide an important framework for the effective implementation of this important risk reduction strategy. The guidelines identify four groups of individuals who have been shown to benefit from statin therapy and update the dosing and monitoring recommendations based on evidence from published, large-scale randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with clinical hard endpoints. Primary care physicians and specialists play key roles in identifying populations at elevated ASCVD risk and providing effective care for patients, especially those with diabetes. This article will summarize the 2013 ACC/AHA guidelines on managing blood cholesterol and provide a practical management overview in order to facilitate implementation of these guidelines for patients with diabetes.
| S-EPMC4748721 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe cut-off for hypertension was lowered to blood pressure (BP) over 130/80 mmHg in the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline. Whether the new definition of hypertension remains a potent risk factor of cerebral microbleeds (CMBs) is uncertain. We aimed to analyze the relationship between the new definition of hypertension and incident CMBs in a 7-year longitudinal community study.MethodsThis study is a sub-study of the Shanghai Aging Study (SAS). A total of 317 participants without stroke or dementia were included at baseline (2009-2011), and were invited to repeated clinical examinations and cerebral magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at follow-up (2016-2018). CMBs at baseline and follow-up were evaluated on T2*-weighted gradient recalled echo (GRE) and susceptibility-weighted angiography (SWAN) sequence of MRI. We classified baseline BP into four categories: normal BP, elevated systolic BP, stage 1 hypertension and stage 2 hypertension according to the ACC/AHA guideline. We assessed the associations between BP categories and incident CMBs by generalized linear models.ResultsA total of 159 participants (median age, 67 years) completed follow-up examinations with a mean interval of 6.9 years. Both stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension at baseline were significantly related with a higher risk of incident CMBs (IRR 2.77, 95% CI, 1.11-6.91, P=0.028; IRR 3.04, 95% CI, 1.29-7.16, P=0.011, respectively), indicating dose-response effects across BP categories. Participants with ≥5 incident CMBs or incident CMBs in the deep locations all had baseline stage 1 and 2 hypertension.ConclusionsParticipants with baseline stage 1 and stage 2 hypertension had a significantly higher risk of incident CMBs in this 7-year longitudinal community cohort.
| S-EPMC7944264 | biostudies-literature