Application of the 2021 ESC Guidelines and SCORE2/SCORE2-OP reclassified outpatients to higher cardiovascular risk categories, reducing the proportion achieving LDL-C goals from 25% to 18% when using the Martin equation.
Cross-Sectional (n=1,539)
No
Does the use of SCORE2/SCORE2-OP and newer LDL-C equations (Martin, Sampson) change cardiovascular risk stratification and LDL-C goal attainment compared to SCORE and the Friedewald formula in outpatients referred for hypertension?
Applying the 2021 ESC Guidelines and SCORE2/SCORE2-OP significantly reclassifies patients to higher cardiovascular risk categories, resulting in a lower proportion of patients achieving LDL-C goals, especially when using the Martin or Sampson equations.
Absolute Event Rate: 18% vs 25%
p-value: p=<0.001
INTRODUCTION: Office blood pressure (OBP) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) calculated by the Friedewald formula (F) are the cornerstones of the cardiovascular risk (CVR) assessment and management based on the SCORE2/SCORE2-OP model proposed by the 2021 ESC Guidelines on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention. AIM: We compared the CVR stratification estimated by the old SCORE and the SCORE2/SCORE2-OP using OBP and ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM), and we evaluated the prevalence of LDL-C control, after calculating it using three validated equations, in outpatients referred for arterial hypertension. METHODS: A cross-sectional study on 1539 consecutive patients with valid ABPM. LDL-C was calculated using the Friedewald formula (F), its modification by Martin (M), and the Sampson (S) equation. SCORE and SCORE2/SCORE2-OP were estimated using OBP, mean daytime (+ 5 mmHg adjustment), and mean 24-hour systolic blood pressure (+ 10 mmHg adjustment). Individual CVR by 2021 ESC Guidelines (and SCORE2/SCORE2-OP) was compared to the 2019 ESC/EAS Guidelines (and SCORE). Differences in the prevalence of LDL-C control according to the three methods to calculate LDL-C were also analysed. RESULTS: Mean age was 60 ± 12 years, with male prevalence (54%). Mean LDL-C values were 118 ± 38 mg/dL (F), 119 ± 37 mg/dL (M), and 120 ± 38 mg/dL (S), respectively. Within the same population, SCORE and SCORE2/SCORE2-OP significantly varied, but no differences emerged after comparing the average SCORE2/SCORE2-OP calculated with OBP (6% IQR 3-10), mean 24-hour systolic BP (7% IQR 4-11), and mean daytime systolic BP (7% IQR 4-11). SCORE2/SCORE2-OP and 2021 ESC Guidelines reclassified the CVR independently of the method used for BP measurement. The low-moderate risk group decreased by 32%, whereas the high and veryhighrisk groups increased by 18% and 12%, respectively. We found a significant reduction in reaching the LDL-C goals regardless of the equation used to calculate it, except for those > 65 years, in whom results were confirmed only by using the M. CONCLUSION: SCORE2/SCORE2-OP and 2021 ESC Guidelines recommendations led to a non-negligible CVR reclassification and subsequent lack of LDL-C goal, regardless of estimating SCORE2 using OBP or ABPM. Calculating the LDL-C with the M may be the best choice in specific settings.
Landolfo et al. (Mon,) conducted a cross-sectional in Arterial hypertension (n=1,539). 2021 ESC Guidelines (SCORE2/SCORE2-OP) risk stratification vs. 2019 ESC/EAS Guidelines (SCORE) risk stratification was evaluated on Prevalence of LDL-C at goal (using Martin equation) (p=<0.001). Application of the 2021 ESC Guidelines and SCORE2/SCORE2-OP reclassified outpatients to higher cardiovascular risk categories, reducing the proportion achieving LDL-C goals from 25% to 18% when using the Martin equation.