Secondary prevention in coronary artery disease. Achieved goals and possibilities for improvements
Introduction
Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the primary cause of death in the developed countries. Despite an improved prognosis probably due to decline in certain risk factors, early revascularisation and improved drug therapy, the burden still remains high. Most probably this is due to an ageing population. Patients with known coronary heart disease run the highest risk of subsequent events, with around 20% running a 10-year risk [1]. These patients with prior disease should be amongst the top priority for prevention. Risk reduction in those patients with known CHD is referred to as secondary prevention.
The INTERHEART study [2] is a large, international, standardised case-control study, designed to assess the importance of risk factors for coronary artery disease. A very high percentage (90% for men, 94% for women) of population-attributable risk in this study was accounted for by easily measured and potentially modifiable risk factors. The most important risk factors identified in the study were high lipid levels (OR 3.2), smoking (OR 2.9), diabetes (OR 2.4) and hypertension (OR 1.9).
Secondary prevention measures are effective in reducing coronary mortality and morbidity [3]. They include lifestyle changes (dietary modification, smoking cessation and weight reduction) and prophylactic drug therapy (beta-blockers, ACE inhibitors, anti-platelet agents and lipid lowering therapy) [4]. Secondary prevention measures have been performed and showed that a large percentage of patients with coronary artery disease do not reach target levels [5].
Prophylactic drug therapy, for example, is underused, despite the fact that the medications are well tolerated and current published guidelines are available [6]. Failure to achieve treatment goals has been related to poor patient risk factor recognition [7] and non-compliance [8], physician non-adherence and co-morbidity resulting in therapy modification.
The primary objective was to describe the secondary prevention measures at a university clinic in Gothenburg, Sweden, for a population with unstable and stable coronary artery disease. A secondary objective was to describe the possibilities to improve some of these measures.
Section snippets
Target population
Patients who were hospitalised at Sahlgrenska University Hospital/Sahlgrenska with a main diagnosis of coronary artery disease (i.e. myocardial infarction or angina pectoris) during the time period 1 Oct 2007–1 Oct 2009. Sahlgrenska has a catchment area of 250 thousand inhabitants.
Coronary artery disease was diagnosed with coronary angiography either prior to or at the time of hospitalisation.
Inclusion criteria
All patients who fulfilled the criteria stated above.
Exclusion criteria (Table 1)
- 1)
High age in combination with severe co-morbidity
Results
In all, 1465 patients were screened for evaluation (i.e. were hospitalised for coronary artery disease during the time of the survey).
Among these patients, 402 (27%) took part in the final evaluation. These patients were evaluated with regard to potential risk indicators. The reasons for exclusion are given in Table 1. The high proportion (38%) excluded due to delayed evaluation was caused by the lack of organisational capacity within the hospital to call all patients within 6 months after
Risk factors
In this study, we have demonstrated a high prevalence of modifiable risk factors in patients with known coronary artery disease. The study is unique since we analysed blood pressure and heart rate over 24 h and related our findings to office blood pressure. We also validated smoking habits with biochemical markers. Finally we evaluated the possibility to quickly treat blood pressure, lipid levels and heart rate in order to reach target levels.
In a large European Survey (EUROASPIRE III) [12] from
Possibility to normalize elevated blood pressure, lipids and heart rate
Our data suggest that it is possible to normalize 80% of patients with elevated lipids and more than 50% of patients with blood pressure or heart rate elevation with treatment modification.
Conclusions
Secondary prevention is important in order to fight the further progression of atherosclerotic disease and reduce mortality in coronary artery disease. The majority of patients do not achieve the guideline target goals and further intensification of therapy is indicated in order to reach them.
In many regards the results from this study is similar to larger multicenter studies (as the EUROASPIRE) but in this study the patients underwent additional evaluation tests such as ambulatory BP,
Conflict of interest
There are no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgement
This study was supported by grants from Pfizer Pharmaceuticals. The authors of this manuscript have certified that they comply with the Principles of Ethical Publishing in the International Journal of Cardiology. Shewan LG and Coats AJ. Ethical authorship and publishing. Int J Cardiol 2010;144: 1–2 [29].
References (29)
- et al.
Effect of potentially modifiable risk factors associated with myocardial infarction in 52 countries (the INTERHEART study): case-control study
Lancet
(2004) - et al.
Effectiveness of secondary prevention programmes in CHD
Lancet
(2009) - et al.
Cardiovascular prevention guidelines in daily practice: a comparison of EUROASPIRE I, II, and III surveys in eight European countries
Lancet
(2009) - et al.
Reduction in recurrent cardiovascular events with intensive lipid-lowering statin therapy compared with moderate lipid-lowering statin therapy after acute coronary syndromes from the PROVE IT-TIMI 22 (Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 22) trial
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2009) - et al.
Increasing BMI and waist circumference and prevalence of obesity among adults with Type 2 diabetes: the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys
J Diabetes Complications
(2010) - et al.
Obesity and the risk of myocardial infarction in 27,000 participants from 52 countries: a case-control study
Lancet
(2005) - et al.
Ethics in the authorship and publishing of scientific articles
Int J Cardiol
(2010) - et al.
Simple scoring scheme for calculating the risk of acute coronary events based on the 10-year follow-up of the prospective cardiovascular Munster (PROCAM) study
Circulation
(2002) - et al.
Meta-analysis: secondary prevention programs for patients with coronary artery disease
Ann Intern Med
(2005) - et al.
EUROASPIRE III: a survey on the lifestyle, risk factors and use of cardioprotective drug therapies in coronary patients from 22 European countries
Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil
(2009)
Underidentification and undertreatment issues
J Manag Care Pharm
Risk factor awareness and secondary prevention of coronary artery disease: are we doing enough?
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg
Non-attendance at secondary prevention clinics: the effect on lipid management
Scott Med J
Accuracy of the SpaceLabs Medical 90217 ambulatory blood pressure monitor
Blood Press Monit
Cited by (10)
To maintain a proper follow-up of the patients with coronary artery disease is as nearly important as medications
2013, International Journal of CardiologyTrivial or troublesome: Experience with coronary heart disease medication from the patient’s perspective
2020, Patient Preference and Adherence