62 Low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), are we achieving treatment goals in patients after acute coronary syndrome? – A real world observational study. (28th September 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Zein, A; Saeidi, R; Patel, J; O'Connor, A
• Is Part Of: Heart. Volume 102(2016)Supplement 9
• Page Start: A33
• Page End: A33
• Publication Date: 2016-09-28
• Subjects: Heart -- Diseases -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Cardiology -- Periodicals; 616.12
• DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2016-310523.62
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1355-6037

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction: Dyslipidaemia is one of the most important risk factors for coronary heart disease (CHD). Lowering of LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) causes significant reduction in morbidity and mortality, particularly in patients with established CHD post acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The aim of this this study was to assess whether patients presenting to our centre that underwent coronary angiography for ACS are achieving the target level of LDL-C as recommended by European society of cardiology (<1.8 mmol/L). Methods and results: A total of 559 consecutative patient with ACS {109(19.5%) STEMI, 279 (49.9%) NSTEMI, 171 (30.6%) UA} presenting to our regional catheterisation laboratory between June 2013 and December 2014 were identified from our local database. We performed an electronic search for their lipid profile (total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), LDL-C and HDL-C) performed any time after 6 weeks from presentation up to November 2015. Mean age was 68.7 ± 12.5 years, 64.9% were males. 73.5% had their lipids profiles performed at a median 149 days (42–740) follow up. Table 1 shows baseline characteristic. Mean LDL was 1.84 ± 0.77 mmol/L with 53% reaching target LDL-C <1.8 mmol/L. Mean HDL-C was 1.26 ± 0.37 mmol/L and TG was 1.44 ± 0.83 mmol/L with 80.7% and 74.7 % reaching desirable level (≥1 mmol/L and <1.7 mmol/L) respectively. Conclusion: In this single centre real-world observational study of acute coronary syndrome patients, mean lipid targets were comparible with recommended guidelines. However, a significant proportion of patients either had no lipid profile performed at follow up or were not achieving treatment goals. Further efforts should be made at a local, national and European level to improve secondary prevention strategies.