Prevention Of Cardiovascular Disease In People Research Articles

Cardiovascular disease prevention in people living with HIV: from REPRIEVE to a statin of grace.

Cardiovascular disease prevention in people living with HIV: from REPRIEVE to a statin of grace.

Periodontal therapy for primary or secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in people with periodontitis.

There may be an association between periodontitis and cardiovascular disease (CVD); however, the evidence so far has been uncertain about whether periodontal therapy can help prevent CVD in people diagnosed with chronic periodontitis. This is the third update of a review originally published in 2014, and most recently updated in 2019. Although there is a new multidimensional staging and grading system for periodontitis, we have retained the label 'chronic periodontitis' in this version of the review since available studies are based on the previous classification system. To investigate the effects of periodontal therapy for primary or secondary prevention of CVD in people with chronic periodontitis. An information specialist searched five bibliographic databases up to 17 November 2021 and additional search methods were used to identify published, unpublished, and ongoing studies. We also searched the Chinese BioMedical Literature Database, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the VIP database, and Sciencepaper Online to March 2022. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared active periodontal therapy to no periodontal treatment or a different periodontal treatment. We included studies of participants with a diagnosis of chronic periodontitis, either with CVD (secondary prevention studies) or without CVD (primary prevention studies). Two review authors carried out the study identification, data extraction, and 'Risk of bias' assessment independently and in duplicate. They resolved any discrepancies by discussion, or with a third review author. We adopted a formal pilot-tested data extraction form, and used the Cochrane tool to assess the risk of bias in the studies. We used GRADE criteria to assess the certainty of the evidence. There are no new completed RCTs on this topic since we published our last update in 2019. We included two RCTs in the review. One study focused on the primary prevention of CVD, and the other addressed secondary prevention. We evaluated both as being at high risk of bias. Our primary outcomes of interest were death (all-cause and CVD-related) and all cardiovascular events, measured at one-year follow-up or longer. For primary prevention of CVD in participants with periodontitis and metabolic syndrome, one study (165 participants) provided very low-certainty evidence. There was only one death in the study; we were unable to determine whether scaling and root planning plus amoxicillin and metronidazole could reduce incidence of all-cause death (Peto odds ratio (OR) 7.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 376.98), or all CVD-related death (Peto OR 7.48, 95% CI 0.15 to 376.98). We could not exclude the possibility that scaling and root planning plus amoxicillin and metronidazole could increase cardiovascular events (Peto OR 7.77, 95% CI 1.07 to 56.1) compared with supragingival scaling measured at 12-month follow-up. For secondary prevention of CVD, one pilot study randomised 303 participants to receive scaling and root planning plus oral hygiene instruction (periodontal treatment) or oral hygiene instruction plus a copy of radiographs and recommendation to follow-up with a dentist (community care). As cardiovascular events had been measured for different time periods of between 6 and 25 months, and only 37 participants were available with at least one-year follow-up, we did not consider the data to be sufficiently robust for inclusion in this review. The study did not evaluate all-cause death and all CVD-related death. We are unable to draw any conclusions about the effects of periodontal therapy on secondary prevention of CVD. For primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in people diagnosed with periodontitis and metabolic syndrome, very low-certainty evidence was inconclusive about the effects of scaling and root planning plus antibiotics compared to supragingival scaling. There is no reliable evidence available regarding secondary prevention of CVD in people diagnosed with chronic periodontitis and CVD. Further trials are needed to reach conclusions about whether treatment for periodontal disease can help prevent occurrence or recurrence of CVD.

Prediction of Five-Year Cardiovascular Disease Risk in People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Derivation in Nanjing, China and External Validation in Scotland, UK.

Background:To use routinely collected data to develop a five-year cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction model for Chinese adults with type 2 diabetes with validation of its performance in a population of European ancestry.Methods:People with incident type 2 diabetes and no history of CVD at diagnosis of diabetes between 2008 and 2017 were included in derivation and validation cohorts. The derivation cohort was identified from a pseudonymized research extract of data from the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University (NMU). Five-year risk of CVD was estimated using basic and extended Cox proportional hazards regression models including 6 and 11 predictors respectively. The risk prediction models were internally validated and externally validated in a Scottish population–based cohort with CVD events identified from linked hospital records. Discrimination and calibration were assessed using Harrell’s C-statistic and calibration plots, respectively.Results:Mean age of the derivation and validation cohorts were 58.4 and 59.2 years, respectively, with 53.5% and 56.9% men. During a median follow-up time of 4.75 [2.67, 7.42] years, 18,827 (22.25%) of the 84,630 people in the NMU-Diabetes cohort and 8,763 (7.31%) of the Scottish cohort of 119,891 people developed CVD. The extended model had a C-statistic of 0.723 [0.721–0.724] in internal validation and 0.716 [0.713–0.719] in external validation.Conclusions:It is possible to generate a risk prediction model with moderate discriminative power in internal and external validation derived from routinely collected Chinese hospital data. The proposed risk score could be used to improve CVD prevention in people with diabetes.

Prediction of Ten-Year Cardiovascular Disease Risk in People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Derivation in Nanjing, China and External Validation in Scotland, UK

Objective: To use routinely collected data to develop a 10-year cardiovascular disease(CVD) risk prediction model for Chinese adults with type 2 diabetes with validation of its performance in a population of European ancestry. Research Design and Methods: People with incident type 2 diabetes and no history of CVD at diagnosis of diabetes between 2008 and 2017 were included in derivation and validation cohorts. The derivation cohort was identified from a pseudonymised research extract of data from the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University(NMU). Ten-year risk of CVD was estimated using basic and extended Cox proportional hazards regression models including six and 11 predictors respectively. The risk prediction models were internally validated by a bootstrap approach and externally validated in a Scottish population-based cohort with CVD events identified from linked hospital records. Discrimination and calibration were assessed using Harrell’s C statistic and calibration plots, respectively. Results: Mean age of the derivation and validation cohorts were 58.4 and 59.2 years, with 53.5% and 56.9% men respectively. During a median follow-up time of 4.75 [2.67, 7.42] years, 18,827 (22.25%) of the 84,630 people in the NMU cohort and 8,763(7.31%) of the Scottish cohort of 119,891 people developed CVD. The extended model had a C statistic of 0.723[0.721-0.724] in internal validation and 0.716 [0.713-0.719] in external validation. Conclusions: It is possible to generate a risk prediction model with moderate discriminative power in internal and external validation derived from routinely collected Chinese hospital data. The proposed risk score in this paper could be used to improve CVD prevention in people with diabetes. Funding Statement: This work was supported by grants from the National key Research & Development Plan of the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic of China (Grant no. 2018YFC1314900, 2018YFC1314901), 2019 Provincial Special Guide Fund Project for the Development of Modern Service Industry (2019 (783) ), the 2018 Projects of Jiangsu Province Department of Industry and Information Technology(Grant no. 2018419) and the 2016 Projects of Nanjing Science Bureau (Grant no. 201608003). Declaration of Interests: The authors declare no competing interests. Ethics Approval Statement: Approval for generation and analysis of the linked data set was provided by the Jiangsu Province Hospitals and the Nanjing Medical University ethics committees.

The influence of healthcare financing on cardiovascular disease prevention in people living with HIV

BackgroundPeople living with HIV are diagnosed with age-related chronic health conditions, including cardiovascular disease, at higher than expected rates. Medical management of these chronic health conditions frequently occur in HIV specialty clinics by providers trained in general internal medicine, family medicine, or infectious disease. In recent years, changes in the healthcare financing for people living with HIV in the U.S. has been dynamic due to changes in the Affordable Care Act. There is little evidence examining how healthcare financing characteristics shape primary and secondary cardiovascular disease prevention among people living with HIV. Our objective was to examine the perspectives of people living with HIV and their healthcare providers on how healthcare financing influences cardiovascular disease prevention.MethodsAs part of the EXTRA-CVD study, we conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 51 people living with HIV and 34 multidisciplinary healthcare providers and at three U.S. HIV clinics in Ohio and North Carolina from October 2018 to March 2019. Thematic analysis using Template Analysis techniques was used to examine healthcare financing barriers and enablers of cardiovascular disease prevention in people living with HIV.ResultsThree themes emerged across sites and disciplines (1): healthcare payers substantially shape preventative cardiovascular care in HIV clinics (2); physician compensation tied to relative value units disincentivizes cardiovascular disease prevention efforts by HIV providers; and (3) grant-based services enable tailored cardiovascular disease prevention, but sustainability is limited by sponsor priorities.ConclusionsWith HIV now a chronic disease, there is a growing need for HIV-specific cardiovascular disease prevention; however, healthcare financing complicates effective delivery of this preventative care. It is important to understand the effects of evolving payer models on patient and healthcare provider behavior. Additional systematic investigation of these models will help HIV specialty clinics implement cardiovascular disease prevention within a dynamic reimbursement landscape.Trial registrationClinical Trial Registration Number: NCT03643705.

Statins for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease prevention in people living with HIV in Thailand: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

IntroductionPeople living with HIV (PLHIV) have an elevated risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared to their HIV‐negative peers. Expanding statin use may help alleviate this burden. However, the choice of statin in the context of antiretroviral therapy is challenging. Pravastatin and pitavastatin improve cholesterol levels in PLHIV without interacting substantially with antiretroviral therapy. They are also more expensive than most statins. We evaluated the cost‐effectiveness of pravastatin and pitavastatin for the primary prevention of CVD among PLHIV in Thailand who are not currently using lipid‐lowering therapy.MethodsWe developed a discrete‐state microsimulation model that randomly selected (with replacement) individuals from the TREAT Asia HIV Observational Database cohort who were aged 40 to 75 years, receiving antiretroviral therapy in Thailand, and not using lipid‐lowering therapy. The model simulated each individual’s probability of experiencing CVD. We evaluated: (1) treating no one with statins; (2) treating everyone with pravastatin 20mg/day (drug cost 7568 Thai Baht ($US243)/year) and (3) treating everyone with pitavastatin 2 mg/day (drug cost 8182 Baht ($US263)/year). Direct medical costs and quality‐adjusted life‐years (QALYs) were assigned in annual cycles over a 20‐year time horizon and discounted at 3% per year. We assumed the Thai healthcare sector perspective.ResultsPravastatin was estimated to be less effective and less cost‐effective than pitavastatin and was therefore dominated (extended) by pitavastatin. Patients receiving pitavastatin accumulated 0.042 additional QALYs compared with those not using a statin, at an extra cost of 96,442 Baht ($US3095), giving an incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio of 2,300,000 Baht ($US73,812)/QALY gained. These findings were sensitive to statin costs and statin efficacy, pill burden, and targeting of PLHIV based on CVD risk. At a willingness‐to‐pay threshold of 160,000 Baht ($US5135)/QALY gained, we estimated that pravastatin would become cost‐effective at an annual cost of 415 Baht ($US13.30)/year and pitavastatin would become cost‐effective at an annual cost of 600 Baht ($US19.30)/year.ConclusionsNeither pravastatin nor pitavastatin were projected to be cost‐effective for the primary prevention of CVD among PLHIV in Thailand who are not currently using lipid‐lowering therapy. We do not recommend expanding current use of these drugs among PLHIV in Thailand without substantial price reduction.

Primary prevention efforts are poorly developed in people at high cardiovascular risk: A report from the European Society of Cardiology EURObservational Research Programme EUROASPIRE V survey in 16 European countries

European Action on Secondary and Primary Prevention by Intervention to Reduce Events (EUROASPIRE) V in primary care was carried out by the European Society of Cardiology EURObservational Research Programme in 2016-2018. The main objective was to determine whether the 2016 Joint European Societies' guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in people at high cardiovascular risk have been implemented in clinical practice. The method used was a cross-sectional survey in 78 centres from 16 European countries. Patients without a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease either started on blood pressure and/or lipid and/or glucose lowering treatments were identified and interviewed ≥ 6 months after the start of medication. A total of 3562 medical records were reviewed and 2759 patients (57.6% women; mean age 59.0 ± 11.6 years) interviewed (interview rate 70.0%). The risk factor control was poor with 18.1% of patients being smokers, 43.5% obese (body mass index ≥30 kg/m2) and 63.8% centrally obese (waist circumference ≥88 cm for women, ≥102 cm for men). Of patients on blood pressure lowering medication 47.0% reached the target of <140/90 mm Hg (<140/85 mm Hg in people with diabetes). Among treated dyslipidaemic patients only 46.9% attained low density lipoprotein-cholesterol target of <2.6 mmol/l. Among people treated for type 2 diabetes mellitus, 65.2% achieved the HbA1c target of <7.0%. The primary care arm of the EUROASPIRE V survey revealed that large proportions of people at high cardiovascular disease risk have unhealthy lifestyles and inadequate control of blood pressure, lipids and diabetes. Thus, the potential to reduce the risk of future cardiovascular disease throughout Europe by improved preventive cardiology programmes is substantial.

Periodontal therapy for primary or secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in people with periodontitis.

There may be an association between periodontitis and cardiovascular disease (CVD); however, the evidence so far has been uncertain about whether periodontal therapy can help prevent CVD in people diagnosed with chronic periodontitis. This is the second update of a review originally published in 2014, and first updated in 2017. Although there is a new multidimensional staging and grading system for periodontitis, we have retained the label 'chronic periodontitis' in this version of the review since available studies are based on the previous classification system. To investigate the effects of periodontal therapy for primary or secondary prevention of CVD in people with chronic periodontitis. Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL, two trials registries, and the grey literature to September 2019. We placed no restrictions on the language or date of publication. We also searched the Chinese BioMedical Literature Database, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the VIP database, and Sciencepaper Online to August 2019. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared active periodontal therapy to no periodontal treatment or a different periodontal treatment. We included studies of participants with a diagnosis of chronic periodontitis, either with CVD (secondary prevention studies) or without CVD (primary prevention studies). Two review authors carried out the study identification, data extraction, and 'Risk of bias' assessment independently and in duplicate. They resolved any discrepancies by discussion, or with a third review author. We adopted a formal pilot-tested data extraction form, and used the Cochrane tool to assess the risk of bias in the studies. We used GRADE criteria to assess the certainty of the evidence. We included two RCTs in the review. One study focused on the primary prevention of CVD, and the other addressed secondary prevention. We evaluated both as being at high risk of bias. Our primary outcomes of interest were death (all-cause and CVD-related) and all cardiovascular events, measured at one-year follow-up or longer. For primary prevention of CVD in participants with periodontitis and metabolic syndrome, one study (165 participants) provided very low-certainty evidence. There was only one death in the study; we were unable to determine whether scaling and root planning plus amoxicillin and metronidazole could reduce incidence of all-cause death (Peto odds ratio (OR) 7.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 376.98), or all CVD-related death (Peto OR 7.48, 95% CI 0.15 to 376.98). We could not exclude the possibility that scaling and root planning plus amoxicillin and metronidazole could increase cardiovascular events (Peto OR 7.77, 95% CI 1.07 to 56.1) compared with supragingival scaling measured at 12-month follow-up. For secondary prevention of CVD, one pilot study randomised 303 participants to receive scaling and root planning plus oral hygiene instruction (periodontal treatment) or oral hygiene instruction plus a copy of radiographs and recommendation to follow-up with a dentist (community care). As cardiovascular events had been measured for different time periods of between 6 and 25 months, and only 37 participants were available with at least one-year follow-up, we did not consider the data to be sufficiently robust for inclusion in this review. The study did not evaluate all-cause death and all CVD-related death. We are unable to draw any conclusions about the effects of periodontal therapy on secondary prevention of CVD. For primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in people diagnosed with periodontitis and metabolic syndrome, very low-certainty evidence was inconclusive about the effects of scaling and root planning plus antibiotics compared to supragingival scaling. There is no reliable evidence available regarding secondary prevention of CVD in people diagnosed with chronic periodontitis and CVD. Further trials are needed to reach conclusions about whether treatment for periodontal disease can help prevent occurrence or recurrence of CVD.

Do participants with depression receive more counseling on cardiovascular disease risk factors? The results of the WOBASZ II study.

Background Depression was found to increase the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). In terms of CVD prevention in people with depressive symptoms, the main goal is to successfully control classic CVD risk factors. Aims: The aim of the study was to assess the relationship between depression and 1) the frequency of healthcare utilization, 2) counseling on main CVD risk factors during usual medical visits, 3) compliance with pharmacotherapy in primary and secondary prevention. Methods WOBASZ II was a cross‑sectional study targeting a representative sample of the Polish population. Trained nurses obtained information on depression (using the Beck Depression Inventory), education, healthcare utilization, counseling on CVD risk factors, and compliance with the recommended pharmacotherapy. Results As many as 5531 participants completed the Beck Depression Inventory questionnaire and provided information on CVD. After adjustment for age, sex, and education, participants without CVD but with depression had blood pressure measured slightly more often and received more frequent counseling on: nutrition (40% more), physical activity (43% more), and smoking cessation (nearly 30% more). Counseling on main CVD risk factors during typical visits and compliance with the recommended pharmacotherapy did not differ with regards to depression in patients with a history of CVD. Conclusions The recommendations from the European Society of Cardiology for particularly careful control of CVD risk factors in people with depression are to some extent reflected in primary prevention. The relationship between depression and counseling on CVD risk factors in patients with CVD was insignificant. Compliance with the recommended pharmacotherapy was not related to depression.

Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in diabetes.

Aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in diabetes.

Prediction of individual life-years gained without cardiovascular events from lipid, blood pressure, glucose, and aspirin treatment based on data of more than 500000 patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Although group-level effectiveness of lipid, blood pressure, glucose, and aspirin treatment for prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) has been proven by trials, important differences in absolute effectiveness exist between individuals. We aim to develop and validate a prediction tool for individualizing lifelong CVD prevention in people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) predicting life-years gained without myocardial infarction or stroke. We developed and validated the Diabetes Lifetime-perspective prediction (DIAL) model, consisting of two complementary competing risk adjusted Cox proportional hazards functions using data from people with T2DM registered in the Swedish National Diabetes Registry (n = 389366). Competing outcomes were (i) CVD events (vascular mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and (ii) non-vascular mortality. Predictors were age, sex, smoking, systolic blood pressure, body mass index, haemoglobin A1c, estimated glomerular filtration rate, non- high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, albuminuria, T2DM duration, insulin treatment, and history of CVD. External validation was performed using data from the ADVANCE, ACCORD, ASCOT and ALLHAT-LLT-trials, the SMART and EPIC-NL cohorts, and the Scottish diabetes register (total n = 197785). Predicted and observed CVD-free survival showed good agreement in all validation sets. C-statistics for prediction of CVD were 0.83 (95% confidence interval: 0.83-0.84) and 0.64-0.65 for internal and external validation, respectively. We provide an interactive calculator at www.U-Prevent.com that combines model predictions with relative treatment effects from trials to predict individual benefit from preventive treatment. Cardiovascular disease-free life expectancy and effects of lifelong prevention in terms of CVD-free life-years gained can be estimated for people with T2DM using readily available clinical characteristics. Predictions of individual-level treatment effects facilitate translation of trial results to individual patients.

Periodontal therapy for the management of cardiovascular disease in patients with chronic periodontitis.

There is an association between chronic periodontitis and cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, it is not known whether periodontal therapy could prevent or manage CVD in patients with chronic periodontitis. The objective of this systematic review was to investigate the effects of periodontal therapy in preventing the occurrence of, and management or recurrence of, CVD in patients with chronic periodontitis. Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 31 August 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 7), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 31 August 2017), Embase Ovid (1980 to 31 August 2017) and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL EBSCO) (1937 to 31 August 2017) . The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and Open Grey were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.We also searched the Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (1978 to 27 August 2017), the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (1994 to 27 August 2017), the VIP database (1989 to 27 August 2017) and Sciencepaper Online (2003 to 27 August 2017). Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs were considered eligible. Studies were selected if they included patients with a diagnosis of chronic periodontitis and previous CVD (secondary prevention studies) or no CVD (primary prevention studies); patients in the intervention group received active periodontal therapy compared to maintenance therapy, no periodontal treatment or another kind of periodontal treatment in the control group. Two review authors carried out the study identification, data extraction and risk of bias assessment independently and in duplicate. Any discrepancies between the two authors were resolved by discussion or with a third review author. A formal pilot-tested data extraction form was adopted for the data extraction, and the Cochrane tool for risk of bias assessment was used for the critical appraisal of the literature. No studies were identified that assessed primary prevention of CVD in people with periodontitis. One study involving 303 participants with ≥ 50% blockage of one coronary artery or a coronary event within three years, but not the three months prior, was included. The study was at high risk of bias due to deviation from the protocol treatment allocation and lack of follow-up data. The trial compared scaling and root planing (SRP) with community care for a follow-up period of six to 25 months. No data on deaths (all-cause or CVD-related) were reported. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effect of SRP and community care in reducing the risk of CVD recurrence in patients with chronic periodontitis (risk ratio (RR) 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23 to 2.22; very low quality evidence). The effects of SRP compared with community care on high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) (mean difference (MD) 0.62; -1.45 to 2.69), the number of patients with high hs-CRP (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.85) and adverse events (RR 9.06; 95% CI 0.49 to 166.82) were also not statistically significant. The study did not assess modifiable cardiovascular risk factors, other blood test results, heart function parameters or revascularisation procedures. We found very low quality evidence that was insufficient to support or refute whether periodontal therapy can prevent the recurrence of CVD in the long term in patients with chronic periodontitis. No evidence on primary prevention was found.

Lifestyle and risk factor management in people at high cardiovascular risk from Bulgaria, Croatia, Poland, Romania and the United Kingdom who participated in both the EUROASPIRE III and IV primary care surveys

The objective of this study was to determine time trends in the implementation of European guidelines on the management of cardiovascular disease prevention in people at high cardiovascular risk. Cardiovascular disease prevention as reflected in the primary care arms of the EUROASPIRE III and IV surveys were compared in centres from Bulgaria, Croatia, Poland, Romania and the United Kingdom that participated in both surveys. All patients were free of cardiovascular disease but considered at high cardiovascular disease risk since they had been started on blood pressure and/or lipid and/or glucose lowering treatments. They were interviewed and examined by means of standardized methods ≥6 months after the start of therapy. EUROASPIRE III comprised 2604 and EUROASPIRE IV 3286 subjects whereof 76% and 56% were interviewed. There were no major differences between the two surveys in age, gender, centres and reasons for inclusion. The prevalence of smoking was similar between EUROASPIRE III and IV. The proportion of smokers who did not intend to quit was significantly greater in EUROASPIRE IV compared with III. The prevalence of overweight or obesity was high and identical in both surveys. No significant differences were observed in physical activity. In participants not on blood pressure lowering treatment an elevated blood pressure was observed in 47% in both EUROASPIRE III and IV. In participants not on lipid lowering drugs the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was ≥2.5 mmol/l in 87% and 88% in EUROASPIRE III and IV respectively. In participants free from known diabetes fasting plasma glucose was ≥7 mmol/l in 12% and 18% in EUROASPIRE III and IV. In subjects with known arterial hypertension blood pressure was at or below guideline recommended targets in 28% in EUROASPIRE III and 35% in IV. In participants on lipid lowering drugs the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was < 2.5 mmol/l in 28% and 37% in EUROASPIRE III and IV. Glycated haemoglobin was < 7.0% in participants with known diabetes in 62% and 60% in EUROASPIRE III and IV. The results from EUROASPIRE III and IV clearly demonstrate that the control of modifiable risk factors in people at high cardiovascular disease risk remains poor.

Periodontal therapy for the management of cardiovascular disease in patients with chronic periodontitis.

There is an association between chronic periodontitis and cardiovascular disease (CVD). However, it is not known whether periodontal therapy could prevent or manage CVD in patients with chronic periodontitis. The objective of this systematic review was to investigate the effects of periodontal therapy in preventing the occurrence of, and management or recurrence of, CVD in patients with chronic periodontitis. The electronic databases that were searched were the Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 7 April 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 3), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 7 April 2014), EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 7 April 2014), CINAHL via EBSCO (1937 to 7 April 2014), OpenGrey (to 7 April 2014), the Chinese BioMedical Literature Database (1978 to April 2014), the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (1994 to April 2014) and the VIP database (1989 to April 2014). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Register, the World Health Organization (WHO) Clinical Trials Registry Platform and Sciencepaper Online for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs were considered eligible. Studies were selected if they included patients with a diagnosis of chronic periodontitis and previous CVD (secondary prevention studies) or no CVD (primary prevention studies); patients in the intervention group received active periodontal therapy compared to maintenance therapy, no periodontal treatment or another kind of periodontal treatment in the control group. Two review authors carried out the study identification, data extraction and risk of bias assessment independently and in duplicate. Any discrepancies between the two authors were resolved by discussion or with a third review author. A formal pilot-tested data extraction form was adopted for the data extraction, and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for risk of bias assessment was used for the critical appraisal of the literature. No studies were identified that assessed primary prevention of CVD in people with periodontitis. One study involving 303 participants with ≥ 50% blockage of one coronary artery or a coronary event within three years, but not the three months prior, was included. The study was at high risk of bias due to deviation from the protocol treatment allocation and lack of follow-up data. The trial compared scaling and root planing (SRP) with community care for a follow-up period of six to 25 months. No data on deaths (all-cause or CVD-related) were reported. There was insufficient evidence to determine the effect of SRP and community care in reducing the risk of CVD recurrence in patients with chronic periodontitis (risk ratio (RR) 0.72; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23 to 2.22; very low quality evidence). The effects of SRP compared with community care on high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) (mean difference (MD) 0.62; -1.45 to 2.69), the number of patients with high hs-CRP (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.32 to 1.85) and adverse events (RR 9.06; 95% CI 0.49 to 166.82) were also not statistically significant. The study did not assess modifiable cardiovascular risk factors, other blood test results, heart function parameters or revascularisation procedures. We found very low quality evidence that was insufficient to support or refute whether periodontal therapy can prevent the recurrence of CVD in the long term in patients with chronic periodontitis. No evidence on primary prevention was found.

The ADVANCE cardiovascular risk model and current strategies for cardiovascular disease risk evaluation in people with diabetes

SummaryPurposeTo critically examine existing approaches to cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk evaluation in people with diabetes, and discuss the use of accurate and validated absolute CVD risk tools as an appropriate basis for CVD prevention in people with diabetes.MethodsThis was a narrative review using evidence from the ADVANCE study and all relevant publications identified via PubMed MEDLINE.ResultsThere is sufficient evidence that diabetes does not confer a CVD risk equivalent to that in non-diabetic people with existing CVD in all circumstances. In people with diabetes, CVD risk follows a gradient. Reliably capturing this gradient depends on an adequate combination of several risk factors. Many global CVD risk tools applicable to people with diabetes have been developed. Those derived from older cohorts are less accurate in contemporary populations and many newer tools have not been tested. The ADVANCE risk engine, recently developed from the large multinational ADVANCE study, showed acceptable performance on the ADVANCE population and largely outperformed the popular Framingham risk equation when tested on the multinational DIAB-HYCAR cohort of people with type 2 diabetes.ConclusionsThe high-risk status conferred by diabetes does not preclude estimation of absolute CVD risk using tools such as the ADVANCE risk engine and its use as the basis for initiating and intensifying CVD preventative measures. Adopting such an accurate and validated tool will likely improve prescriptions and outcomes of diabetes care.

Does training practice nurses to carry out physical health checks for people with severe mental illness increase the level of screening for cardiovascular risk?

Compared to the general population, people with severe mental illness (SMI) have a higher risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD). Authors of clinical guidelines advise annual screening for CVD risk factors with appropriate lifestyle counselling. There are seven recommended elements of this health check: blood pressure, body mass index (or waist circumference), blood glucose, serum cholesterol, diet advice, exercise recommendations and smoking cessation guidance. To establish whether training practice nurses increases the proportion of patients with SMI who are screened for CVD risk factors and given lifestyle advice in primary care. A before-and-after audit of 400 patients on the SMI registers in five primary care centres in Northampton, England. Following the training, the proportion of patients with SMI who received all elements of the health check significantly increased (pre-training: n = 33, 8%, 95% CI = 6-11; post-training: n = 60, 15%, 95% CI = 12-19; RR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.22-2.72, p = .01). Training practice nurses about CVD prevention in people with SMI may be effective in increasing the proportion of patients in this group who receive a comprehensive health check.

EUROASPIRE III. Management of cardiovascular risk factors in asymptomatic high-risk patients in general practice: cross-sectional survey in 12 European countries

To determine whether the 2003 Joint European Societies' guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in people at high cardiovascular risk have been followed in general practice. Cross-sectional survey. The EUROASPIRE survey was carried out in 2006-2007 in 66 general practices in 12 European countries. Patients without a history of coronary or other atherosclerotic disease either started on antihypertensive and/or lipid-lowering and/or antidiabetes treatments were identified retrospectively, interviewed and examined at least 6 months after the start of medication. Four thousand, three hundred and sixty-six high-risk individuals (57.7% females) were interviewed (participation rate 76.7%). Overall, 16.9% smoked cigarettes, 43.5% had body mass index ≥30 kg/m, 70.8% had blood pressure ≥140/90 mmHg (≥130/80 in people with diabetes mellitus), 66.4% had total cholesterol ≥5.0 mmol/l (≥4.5 mmol/l in people with diabetes) and 30.2% reported a history of diabetes. The risk factor control was very poor, with only 26.3% of patients using antihypertensive medication achieving the blood pressure goal, 30.6% of patients on lipid-lowering medication achieving the total cholesterol goal and 39.9% of patients with self-reported diabetes having haemoglobin A1c ≤6.1%. The use of blood pressure-lowering medication in people with hypertension was: β-blockers 34.1%, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers 60.8%, calcium channel blockers 26.3%, diuretics 36.9%. Statins were prescribed in 47.0% of people with hypercholesterolemia. About 22.0% of all patients were on aspirin or other antiplatelet medication. The EUROASPIRE III survey in general practice shows that the lifestyle of people being treated as high cardiovascular risk is a major cause of concern with persistent smoking and high prevalence of both obesity and central obesity. Blood pressure, lipid and glucose control are completely inadequate with most patients not achieving the targets defined in the prevention guidelines. Primary prevention needs a systematic, comprehensive, multidisciplinary approach, which addresses lifestyle and risk factor management by general practitioners, nurses and other allied health professionals, and a health care system which invests in prevention.

Dysglycemia and Cardiovascular Risk in the General Population

Diabetes is a metabolic disorder that is diagnosed when the fasting and/or postload glucose level rises above well-established thresholds. These thresholds were chosen because they identified people at particularly high risk for retinopathy based on epidemiological data. These data also have shown that people with diabetes and poorly controlled glucose levels have higher risks of retinopathy than people with diabetes and well-controlled glucose levels.1,2 Moreover, recent studies have shown that the relationship between chronically elevated glucose levels (as measured by A1c) and retinal disease is not confined to people with diabetes and is apparent (although less marked) in people with high glucose levels that are below the diabetes cutoffs such as those with impaired glucose tolerance and/or impaired fasting glucose.3–5 Thus, there is a progressive relationship between glycemia and retinopathy that extends below glucose thresholds for diabetes. Article p 812 Clearly, diabetes also is a risk factor for many other serious chronic diseases, including cardiovascular disease.6 Indeed, a recent meta-analysis of large prospective studies comprising 450 000 people showed that men and women with diabetes are 2 and 3 times more likely, respectively, to die of coronary heart disease than men and women without diabetes.7 Other studies have shown that the degree of glucose elevation measured by A1c, fasting glucose, or postload glucose is progressively related to the incidence of cardiovascular outcomes in people with established diabetes and in people without diabetes after adjustment for age and varying numbers of other risk factors.8–15 Moreover, several studies that recruited people from both ambulatory and hospitalized settings suggest that there may be a stronger relationship between glycemia and incident cardiovascular outcomes in people without diabetes than in people with diabetes.8,9,15–17 Such a discrepancy may occur because in people with established diabetes, markers of …

Rationale, design, and baseline characteristics for a large international trial of cardiovascular disease prevention in people with dysglycemia: The ORIGIN Trial (Outcome Reduction with an Initial Glargine Intervention)

Impaired fasting glucose (IFG), impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), and diabetes arise due to insufficient insulin secretion and are risk factors for cardiovascular (CV) events. Thus, targeting normal fasting glucose levels with insulin may reduce CV events. Previous studies suggest that omega-3 fatty acid supplements may reduce CV death; however, their effect in high-risk dysglycemic individuals is not known. People aged > or = 50 years with evidence of CV disease and with IFG, IGT, newly detected or established diabetes (on 0 or 1 oral agent), and a local glycated hemoglobin < 150% of the upper limit of normal for that assay were recruited and allocated to (a) either 1 daily injection of insulin glargine with the dose titrated to achieve a fasting plasma glucose < or = 5.3 mmol/L (95 mg/dL), or standard glycemic care; and (b) either omega-3-acid ethyl esters 90 (1 g consisting of EPA 465 mg and DHA 375 mg) or identical placebo, according to a 2 x 2 factorial design. The 2 different primary outcomes for the insulin and omega-3 fatty acid arms are CV events and CV death, respectively. A total of 12,612 (mean age 64, 35% women) people in 40 countries were randomized during a 2-year period ending December 2005. Eighty-two percent had established diabetes, 6% had new diabetes, and 12% had IGT or IFG; the mean fasting plasma glucose was 7.3 mmol/L (131 mg/dL). The ORIGIN trial will determine whether or not either or both of these interventions can reduce CV events.