A retrospective analysis on optimal medical therapy for patients with symptomatic lower extremity peripheral artery disease: a French observational study

Abstract

ObjectivePatients with symptomatic lower extremity artery disease (LEAD) should have an optimal management in terms of lipid goal [i.e. controlled LDL-cholesterol (LDLc)] and medical treatment (triple therapy with an antiplatelet agent, a statin and an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or a angiotensin-receptor antagonist). Prevalence of LEAD patients with a LDLc < 0.55 g/l is unknown. Aims of this study were to: (i) describe the prevalence of patients with a LDLc < 0.55 g/l, (ii) describe the prevalence of patients with an optimal medical treatment; (iii) compare this management between patients with a vascular surgery history and those without a vascular surgery history; and (iv) evaluate the number of patients eligible for new lipid-lowering therapies according to FOURIER and REDUCE-IT criteria.MethodsIn this single-center retrospective study, prevalence is expressed as numbers and percentages. Comparison of the number of well managed patients between LEAD patients with a vascular surgery history and those without was performed. Number of patients who would be eligible for FOURIER and REDUCE-IT studies were calculated.ResultsAmong the LEAD patients included in the analysis (n = 225), only 12.4% (n = 28) had a LDLc < 0.55 g/L. The prevalence of patients who received the optimal medical treatment was 50.7% (n = 114). There was no statistical difference in the prevalence of patients with and without vascular surgery history achieving the LDLc goal (n = 9 (10.6%) vs. n = 19 (13.6%); p = not significant). Ninety-three patients (46.0%) would be eligible for EVOLOCUMAB treatment according to the Fourier study design whereas 17 patients (8.4%) would be eligible for treatment with ICOSAPENT ETHYL according to the REDUCE-IT study design.ConclusionA majority of LEAD patients did not reach the LDLc goals. LEAD patients with a vascular surgery history did not experience a better management whereas they had a more consistent follow-up.