The Hospital Carlos III is a public hospital in the city of Madrid. It belongs to the Servicio Madrileño de Salud, the health service of the Community of Madrid. It was crested in 1990 from the merger of three previous hospitals, and was established as a center of excellence in research and treatment of infectious diseases.A 2013 restructuring led to the closure of some of its rooms and services related to infectious diseases and gave it the role of medium-stay hospital attached to the Hospital Universitario La Paz for referring patients to public hospitals in the Community of Madrid. The need to admit a number of patients affected by Ebola virus disease in 2014 led to the reopening of the infectious disease treatment area.
Background/Objectives: Population aging increases the healthcare burden of chronic diseases. We aimed to characterize the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of Aged Madrid, a cohort comprising 98.6% of the population aged 75 years and older in Madrid, Spain. Methods: Observational study with a five-year retrospective baseline period (2015-2019) to assess baseline vascular and metabolic risk. Data were taken from primary care electronic medical records, hospital discharge summaries, and pharmacy records. Results: 587,603 individuals (mean age: 84 years ± 5.8 years, 61.3% women) were analysed. Obesity affected 31.3% (more frequent in women), while type 2 diabetes occurred in 23.8% (predominantly in men). Hypertension (52.8%), dyslipidaemia (61.6%), and chronic kidney disease (21.7%) were more frequent in women. Atrial fibrillation was the leading cardiovascular condition in women (15.1%), while acute myocardial infarction predominated in men (8.2%). The most prescribed drug classes were antihypertensives (53.8%), statins (44.2%), and oral antidiabetics (26.4%). Among antihypertensives, diuretics (53.9%), ACE inhibitors (27.4%), and ARBs (25.3%) were most used, often in combinations such as diuretics + ACE inhibitors (30.1%). Diabetes treatments favoured metformin and DPP-4 inhibitors; 5.2% received insulin. Conclusions: Sex-based differences emerged in biochemical, anthropometric, and lifestyle variables. Men showed a higher prevalence of cardiovascular diseases and several cardiometabolic risk factors, while women used fewer lipid-lowering and antidiabetic agents. Diuretics were the predominant antihypertensives, and antidiabetic therapy largely followed guideline recommendations. Although 60% of statin users had no prior cardiovascular disease, and their use was concentrated mainly among individuals with major cardiometabolic risk conditions and declined with advancing age, suggesting an age- and risk-sensitive prescribing pattern rather than indiscriminate use.
BACKGROUND:Arterial hypertension and dyslipidemia are two of the most relevant modifiable cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs), and they often coexist. No recent studies specifically evaluating the achievement of LDL-C and blood pressure (BP) targets in hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia are available in Spain. METHODS:The SNAPSHOT study was a multicenter, cross-sectional observational study conducted in cardiology and internal medicine (IM) departments/clinics and primary care (PC) centers in Spain. The study enrolled consecutive adult patients (≥18 years of age) diagnosed with both hypertension and dyslipidemia. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients achieving both the LDL-C goals recommended by the 2021 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines and the BP targets established in the 2018 ESC/European Society of Hypertension (ESH) guidelines. Cardiovascular (CV) risk (very high, high, low-to-moderate) was centrally assessed according to the updated Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE2) and SCORE2-Older Person (OP) algorithms recommended in the 2021 ESC guidelines. RESULTS:Between December 2021 and April 2022, a total of 443 evaluable patients were enrolled (males: 54%; ≥65 years of age: 66.1%; obesity: 37.4%; diabetes mellitus: 37.3%; coronary artery disease [CAD]: 25.7%). Out of the 388 patients in whom CV risk could be assessed, 34.3% and 56.4% were considered as having high and very high risk, respectively. Overall, 24% of the patients had achieved their risk-based LDL-C goals (21.8% of the patients at high-CV risk and 25.1% of those at very high risk), and 30.3% of the patients had reached the recommended BP targets (27.1% of the patients at high risk and 36.1% of those at very high risk). A total of 8.8% of the patients had achieved both the LDL-C and BP targets. Overall, 51.4% of the patients with concurrent diabetes had achieved glycemic control (HbA1c <7%), while only 9.4% of the diabetic patients had reached simultaneous control of LDL-C, BP and HbA1C targets (7.8% of the patients at high risk and 10.4% of those at very high risk). CONCLUSION:The attainment of LDL-C and BP goals is still suboptimal in patients with dyslipidemia and hypertension in the real-world setting in Spain, with approximately 75% of the patients at very high risk of cardiovascular disease failing to reach their risk-based LDL-C and BP targets. Additionally, the rate corresponding to simultaneous control of LDL-C, BP and HbA1c is likewise very low. The present study thus highlights the current challenge of controlling multiple CVRFs that significantly contribute to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events and mortality and emphasizes the need for more effective management of CVRFs in the real-world setting.
One of the objectives of the Spanish Society of Arteriosclerosis is to contribute to the knowledge, prevention and treatment of vascular diseases, which are the leading cause of death in Spain and entail a high degree of disability and health expenditure. Atherosclerosis is a multifactorial disease and its prevention requires a global approach that takes into account the associated risk factors. This document summarises the current evidence and includes recommendations for patients with established vascular disease or at high vascular risk: it reviews the symptoms and signs to evaluate, the laboratory and imaging procedures to request routinely or in special situations, and includes the estimation of vascular risk, diagnostic criteria for entities that are vascular risk factors, and general and specific recommendations for their treatment. Finally, it presents aspects that are not usually referenced in the literature, such as the organisation of a vascular risk consultation.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS:We aimed to understand the impact of physicians' perception about LDL-cholesterol (LDLc) control on the management of patients with dyslipidemia in Spain.METHODS:We performed a cross-sectional and multicenter study, in which 435 healthcare professionals participated in face-to-face meetings, collecting qualitative and quantitative information related to hypercholesterolemia management. Additionally, aggregated anonymized data of the last 10 patients with hypercholesterolemia attended by each physician were collected.RESULTS:A total of 4,010 patients (8%, 13%, 16% and 61% with low, moderate, high, and very high cardiovascular [CV] risk) were included. Physicians' perception was that 62% of their patients attained LDLc goals (66%, 63%, 61% and 56%, for low, moderate, high and very high CV risk, respectively). However, when looking into the data only 31% (vs 62% p<0.01) of patients attained the LDLc goals (47%, 36%, 22% and 25%, respectively). Overall, 33% of patients were taking high intensity statins, 32% statin/ezetimibe, 21% low/moderate intensity statins and 4% PCSK9 inhibitors. These numbers were 38%, 45%, 8% and 6% for very high risk patients and 44%, 21%, 21% and 4% for high CV risk patients. In 32% of patients, a change in lipid lowering therapy was performed after the visit, mainly combining statins/ezetimibe (55%).CONCLUSIONS:In Spain, most patients with dyslipidemia do not achieve the recommended LDLc goals because of an insufficient intensification of lipid lowering therapy. On the one hand, this is in part due to physicians misperception on preventive LDLc control and the need for repeated advice to patient, and, on the other, to the lack of patient adherence.
Abstract Objective To determine the diagnostic discriminant validity between large vessel giant cell arteritis (LV-GCA) and atherosclerosis using ultrasound (US) intima-media thickness (IMT) measurements. Methods We included 44 patients with LV-GCA and 42 with high-risk atherosclerosis. US examinations of the axillary, subclavian, and common carotid arteries (CCA) were systematically performed using a MylabX8 system (Genoa, Italy) with a 4–15-MHz probe. IMT ≥ 1 mm was accepted as pathological. Results The LV-GCA cohort included 24 females and 20 males with a mean age of 72.8 ± 7.6 years. The atherosclerosis group included 25 males and 17 females with a mean age of 70.8 ± 6.5 years. The mean IMT values of all arteries included were significantly higher in LV-GCA than in atherosclerosis. Among LV-GCA patients, IMT ≥ 1 mm was seen in 31 axillary, 30 subclavian, and 28 CCA. In the atherosclerotic cohort, 17 (38.6%) had IMT ≥ 1 mm with axillary involvement in 2 patients, subclavian in 3 patients, carotid distal in 14 patients (5 bilateral), and isolated carotid proximal affectation in 1 case. A cutoff point greater than 1 pathological vessel in the summative count of axillary and subclavian arteries or at least 3 vessels in the count of six vessels, including CCA, showed a precision upper 95% for GCA diagnosis. Conclusion The IMT is higher in LV-GCA than in atherosclerosis. The proposed US halo count achieves an accuracy of > 95% for the differential diagnosis between LV-GCA and atherosclerosis. The axillary and subclavian arteries have higher discriminatory power, while carotid involvement is less specific in the differential diagnosis.
