Faculty Bibliography

Background Dietary interventions may play a role in secondary cardiovascular prevention. hsCRP (High-sensitivity C-reactive protein) is a marker of risk for major adverse cardiovascular outcomes in coronary artery disease. Methods and Results The open-label, blinded end-point, EVADE CAD (Effects of a Vegan Versus the American Heart Association-Recommended Diet in Coronary Artery Disease) trial randomized participants (n=100) with coronary artery disease to 8 weeks of a vegan or American Heart Association-recommended diet with provision of groceries, tools to measure dietary intake, and dietary counseling. The primary end point was high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. A linear regression model compared end points after 8 weeks of a vegan versus American Heart Association diet and adjusted for baseline concentration of the end point. Significance levels for the primary and secondary end points were set at 0.05 and 0.0015, respectively. A vegan diet resulted in a significant 32% lower high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (β, 0.68, 95% confidence interval [0.49-0.94]; P=0.02) when compared with the American Heart Association diet. Results were consistent after adjustment for age, race, baseline waist circumference, diabetes mellitus, and prior myocardial infarction (adjusted β, 0.67 [0.47-0.94], P=0.02). The degree of reduction in body mass index and waist circumference did not significantly differ between the 2 diet groups (adjusted β, 0.99 [0.97-1.00], P=0.10; and adjusted β, 1.00 [0.98-1.01], P=0.66, respectively). There were also no significant differences in markers of glycemic control between the 2 diet groups. There was a nonsignificant 13% reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol with the vegan diet when compared with the American Heart Association diet (adjusted β, 0.87 [0.78-0.97], P=0.01). There were no significant differences in other lipid parameters. Conclusions In patients with coronary artery disease on guideline-directed medical therapy, a vegan diet may be considered to lower high-sensitivity C-reactive protein as a risk marker of adverse outcomes. Clinical Trial Registration URL : http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 02135939.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Blood donation has been proposed as a potential therapy to reduce risk of cardiovascular disease, but the effects of phlebotomy on vascular function in human subjects have not been well characterized. AIMS/OBJECTIVE:We conducted a prospective randomized double-blind study to determine the effects of serial phlebotomy on vascular endothelial function in the brachial artery. 84 iron-replete, non-anemic subjects were randomly assigned to one of three study treatment groups: 1) four serial phlebotomy procedures each followed by intravenous infusion of placebo normal saline; 2) four serial phlebotomy procedures each followed by intravenous infusion to replete lost iron; and 3) four serial sham phlebotomy procedures each followed by intravenous infusion of placebo normal saline. Assigned phlebotomy procedures were conducted at 56-day intervals. We measured brachial artery reactivity (BAR, %) in response to transient oxidative stress induced by oral methionine with high-resolution duplex ultrasound imaging before and one week after the fourth study phlebotomy. RESULTS:Before phlebotomy, oral methionine decreased BAR by -2.04% (95% CI -2.58, -1.50%), p<0.001) with no significant difference between groups (p=0.42). After phlebotomy, the BAR response to oral methionine did not significantly change between groups (p=0.53). Brachial artery nitroglycerin-mediated dilation did not change in response to phlebotomy. CONCLUSIONS:Four serial phlebotomy procedures over six months with or without intravenous iron supplementation did not alter vascular endothelial function in the brachial artery when compared with sham phlebotomy.

Introduction: Thrombocytopenia is a common laboratory abnormality among patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We sought to evaluate associations between thrombocytopenia, in-hospital management and cardiovascular outcomes in patients hospitalized for AMI in the United States.
Method(s): Patients hospitalized from 2004 to 2014 with a primary diagnosis of AMI were identified from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS). Thrombocytopenia was identified based on ICD-9 codes. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate odds of in-hospital adverse events stratified by thrombocytopenia and adjusted for demographics, cardiovascular risk factors, comorbidities, and treatment.
Result(s): A total of 6,717,769 patients were hospitalized with a primary diagnosis of AMI and thrombocytopenia was reported in 219,351 (3.3%). Patients with thrombocytopenia were older, more likely to have medical comorbidities, were more likely to undergo coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG] (28.8% vs. 8.2%, p<0.001), and were less likely to receive a drug eluting stent [DES] (15.5% vs. 29.5%, p<0.001). After multivariable adjustment, thrombocytopenia remained an independent predictor of in-hospital mortality, ischemic stroke, cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest and bleeding complications (Table).
Conclusion(s): This is the largest analysis of AMI outcomes for patients with and without thrombocytopenia. AMI patients with thrombocytopenia have a significantly greater risk of adverse outcomes, are more likely to undergo CABG and less likely receive a DES during hospitalization compared to other AMI patients. Thrombocytopenia may identify AMI patients at high risk for in-hospital morbidity and mortality. Future investigations to mitigate the poor prognosis of patients with AMI and thrombocytopenia are warranted

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), the most common cause of death in T2D. Despite improved risk factor control, however, adults with T2D continue to experience substantial excess CVD risk. Until recently, however, improved glycemic control has not been associated with robust macrovascular benefit. The advent of 2 new classes of antihyperglycemic agents, the sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and their respective large cardiovascular outcome trials, has led to a paradigm shift in how cardiologists and heath care practitioners conceptualize T2D treatment. Herein, the authors review the recent trial evidence, the potential mechanisms of action of the sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, safety concerns, and their use for the primary prevention of CVD as well as in diabetic patients with impaired renal function and heart failure.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Diabetes mellitus is a coronary heart disease (CHD) risk-equivalent for the outcome of peripheral vascular disease. The impact of diabetes with comorbid risk factors on the outcome of peripheral vascular disease remains unexplored. METHODS:We performed a cross-sectional analysis of participants in Lifeline Vascular Screening Inc. age 40-90 who were screened for peripheral vascular disease, defined as lower extremity peripheral artery disease (PAD, ABI <0.9) and/or carotid artery stenosis (CAS, internal CAS ≥50%). CHD was defined as prior myocardial infarction or revascularization. Risk factors included hypertension, hyperlipidemia, smoking, obesity, sedentary lifestyle and family history of cardiovascular disease. RESULTS:Among 3,517,804 participants, PAD and CAS was identified in 4.4% and 3.7%, respectively. Diabetes was identified in 376,528 participants, 324,680 (86%) of whom did not have CHD. Among diabetic participants without CHD, prevalence of PAD increased with 1-2 (4.3%), 3-4 (7.3%), and ≥5 (12.0%) comorbid risk factors (p trend < 0.0001). The pattern was similar for CAS (3.7%, 6.2%, 8.8%, p trend < 0.0001). Compared to participants without diabetes, those with diabetes and 1-2, 3-4 and ≥5 risk factors had increasing odds of PAD and CAS after adjustment for age, sex and race/ethnicity (1.0, 95% CI 0.98-1.06; 1.8, 95% CI 1.8-1.89; 3.5, 95% CI 3.43-3.64, respectively, p trend < 0.0001). By comparison, in nondiabetic participants, CHD increased odds of PAD and CAS by 2-fold (2.06, 95% CI 2.02-2.1; 2.19, 95% CI 2.15-2.23 respectively). CONCLUSIONS:Diabetes, particularly with comorbid risk factors, confers increased odds of PAD and CAS, even in the absence of CHD. Counseling regarding screening and prevention for peripheral vascular disease among individuals with diabetes and multiple risk factors may be useful.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW/OBJECTIVE:Treatment of diabetic dyslipidemia is necessary because of its impact on cardiovascular disease, which is the leading cause of death in patients with diabetes. In the past, standard treatment of diabetic dyslipidemia focused only on correcting lipids. Although this remains the mainstay of treatment, because new antihyperglycemic treatments reduce cardiovascular events with minimal effect on dyslipidemia, a new approach is both timely and relevant. RECENT FINDINGS/RESULTS:LDL-lowering remains the focus of treatment for diabetic dyslipidemia, especially in patients with both diabetes and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Higher intensity statin therapy or lower LDL cholesterol goals are recommended in these patients. Combination therapy, especially with ezetimibe, fibrates, bile acid sequestrants, PCSK9 inhibitors and omega 3 fatty acids should be considered along with selected new agents to reduce glycemia. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS:As diabetic dyslipidemia plays a key role in CVD, aggressive treatment is indicated. New research targets include apo-CIII and lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]. In addition, new antihyperglycemic therapy is changing diabetes care and altering treatment guidelines. The most recent American Diabetes Association Standards of Care has expanded its recommendations for people with CVD and diabetes, suggesting that medications validated to improve cardiac health should be strongly considered.

OBJECTIVE:Patients undergoing noncardiac surgery frequently have diabetes mellitus (DM) and an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease. It is unknown whether temporal declines in the frequency of perioperative major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) apply to patients with DM. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS/METHODS:Patients ≥45 years of age who underwent noncardiac surgery from January 2004 to December 2013 were identified using the U.S. National Inpatient Sample. DM was identified using ICD-9 diagnosis codes. Perioperative MACCEs (in-hospital all-cause mortality, acute myocardial infarction, or acute ischemic stroke) by DM status were evaluated over time. RESULTS:for interaction <0.001). Trends for individual end points were all less favorable for patients with DM versus those without DM. CONCLUSIONS:In an analysis of >10.5 million noncardiac surgeries from a large U.S. hospital admission database, perioperative MACCEs were more common among patients with DM versus without DM. Perioperative MACCEs increased over time and individual end points were all less favorable for patients with DM. Our findings suggest that a substantial unmet need exists for strategies to reduce the risk of perioperative cardiovascular events among patients with DM.

BACKGROUND:Patients undergoing cardiovascular (CV) procedures often have suboptimal CV risk factor control and may benefit from strategies targeting healthy lifestyle behaviors and education. Implementation of prevention strategies may be particularly effective at this point of heightened motivation. METHODS:A prospective, randomized, pilot study was conducted in 400 patients undergoing a nonurgent CV procedure (cardiac catheterization ± revascularization) to evaluate the impact of different prevention strategies. Patients were randomized in a 1:1:1 fashion to usual care (UC; group A, n = 134), in-hospital CV prevention consult (PC; group B, n = 130), or PC plus behavioral intervention program (telephone-based motivational interviewing and optional tailored text messages) (group C, n = 133). The primary end point was the Δ change in non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) from baseline to 6 month. RESULTS:The mean age was 64.6 ± 10.8 years, 23.7% were female, and 31.5% were nonwhite. After 6 months, the absolute difference in non-HDL-C for all participants was -19.8 mg/dL (95% CI -24.1 to -15.6, P < .001). There were no between-group differences in the primary end point for the combined PC groups (B and C) versus UC, with a Δ adjusted between group difference of -5.5 mg/dL (95% CI -13.1 to 2.1, P = .16). Patients in the PC groups were more likely to be on high-intensity statins at 6 months (52.9% vs 38.1%, P = .01). After excluding participants with baseline non-HDL-C <100 mg/dL (initial exclusion criterion), Δ non-HDL-C and Δ low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were improved in the PC groups compared to UC (non-HDL-C -8.13 mg/dL [-16.00 to -0.27], P = .04; low-density lipoprotein cholesterol -7.87mg/dL [-15.10 to -0.64], P = .03). CONCLUSIONS:Although non-HDL-C reduction at 6 months following a nonurgent CV procedure was not significant in the overall cohort, an increased uptake in high-potency statins may translate into improved long-term health outcomes and cost reductions.