Key result
Newly diagnosed ASCVD linked to ~13-point higher LDL-C target non-attainment vs prior ASCVD.
Why the study?
Real-world data describing ESC cardiovascular risk stratification, ASCVD burden and timing, and LDL-C target attainment among hospitalized cardiology patients were limited.
Cohort (n=12,863)
No
In a large cohort of cardiology inpatients, nearly two-thirds were at very high cardiovascular risk and 72.9% failed to meet ESC-recommended LDL-C targets, highlighting hospitalization as a critical opportunity to optimize lipid-lowering therapy.
Background/Introduction Cardiology inpatients represent a unique population in whom lipid management can meaningfully reduce recurrent events. However, data describing European Society of Cardiology (ESC) cardiovascular risk stratification and lipid target attainment in real-world cardiology hospitalizations are limited. Purpose To describe the distribution of ESC cardiovascular risk categories, the burden and timing of ASCVD, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target attainment based on the 2019 ESC/EAS dyslipidaemia guidelines among patients admitted in cardiology departments. Methods Adult patients hospitalized in a tertiary cardiology centre from 2011 until 2022 were analyzed, as part of the retrospective CARDIO study. ASCVD was defined as established coronary, cerebrovascular, peripheral, or aortic atherosclerotic disease, and classified as prior or newly diagnosed during index hospitalization. ESC cardiovascular risk categories (low, moderate, high, very high) were assigned according to guideline criteria. LDL-C levels and ESC-recommended target attainment were assessed overall and according to ASCVD timing. Results Overall, 12,863 patients were included (mean age 68.9 ± 14.6 years, 64.4% male), of whom 7,357 (57.2%) had established ASCVD, predominantly coronary artery disease (93%). Approximately two thirds had documented prior ASCVD and one third were newly diagnosed during the index hospitalization. According to ESC criteria, 61.4% of patients were classified as very high cardiovascular risk, 14.5% as high risk, 15.7% as moderate risk, and 9.0% as low risk. Very-high-risk classification was more frequent among males than females (69.8% vs 46.1%, p < 0.05). Although acute coronary syndromes (ACS) accounted for 26% of admissions, most very-high-risk patients were hospitalized for non-ACS indications (58%). Mean LDL-C was 94.2 ± 37.7 mg/dL and decreased with increasing risk category (p < 0.001). Overall, 72.9% of patients were not at their ESC-recommended LDL-C target, including 84.1% of very-high-risk and 75.5% of high-risk patients; notably, 24.0% of very-high-risk patients had LDL-C ≥116 mg/dL (Figure 1). Compared with patients with prior ASCVD, those with newly diagnosed ASCVD had higher LDL-C levels (108.7 ± 39.8 vs 83.0 ± 34.3 mg/dL, p < 0.001) and a greater prevalence of LDL-C target non-attainment (93.0% vs 79.8%, p < 0.001). Conclusion(s) In this large real-world cardiology inpatient cohort, more than half of patients had established ASCVD and nearly two thirds were classified as very high cardiovascular risk. Approximately three out of four patients did not meet their ESC-recommended LDL-C goals. Almost one-third of ASCVD was newly diagnosed during hospitalization and was associated with significantly poorer LDL-C control compared with patients with known ASCVD. These findings highlight cardiology hospitalization as a critical opportunity for ASCVD detection and optimization of preventive strategies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Samaras et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Cardiovascular disease / ASCVD in cardiology inpatients (n=12,863). Newly diagnosed ASCVD during index hospitalization vs. Prior established ASCVD was evaluated on ESC-recommended LDL-C target non-attainment (p=<0.001). Cardiology inpatients failed to meet ESC LDL-C targets in 72.9% of cases, with higher non-attainment in newly diagnosed vs prior ASCVD (93.0% vs 79.8%, p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:
More from European Heart Journal