Cardionerds: A Cardiology Podcast cover image

Cardionerds: A Cardiology Podcast

Latest episodes

undefined
May 27, 2022 • 44min

210. Family History of Premature ASCVD with Dr. Ann Marie Navar

CardioNerds (Amit Goyal and Daniel Ambinder), Dr. Ahmed Ghoneem (CardioNerds Academy Chief of House Taussig and medicine resident at Lahey Hospital), and Dr. Gurleen Kaur (Director of CardioNerds Internship and medicine resident at Brigham and Women’s Hospital) discuss family history of premature ASCVD with Dr. Ann Marie Navar, Preventive Cardiologist and Associate Professor in the Departments of Internal Medicine and Population and Data Sciences at UT Southwestern Medical Center. They discuss the art of soliciting a nuanced family history, refining cardiovascular risk using risk models and novel markers, counseling patients with elevated risk, and more. Show notes were drafted by Dr. Ahmed Ghoneem and reviewed by Dr. Gurleen Kaur. Audio editing was performed by CardioNerds Intern, student Dr. Adriana Mares. For related teaching, check out this Tweetorial about CAC by Dr. Gurleen Kaur, the Family History of Premature ASCVD Infographic by Dr. Ahmed Ghoneem, and the CardioNerds Cardiovascular Prevention Series. CardioNerds Cardiovascular Prevention PageCardioNerds Episode Page Show notes - Family History of Premature ASCVD with Dr. Ann Marie Navar Patient summary: Mr. B is a 51-year-old gentleman who is referred to CardioNerds Prevention Clinic by his PCP. He does not have a significant past medical history. He is a former smoker but quit 2 years ago. His BP in clinic today is 138/84; he is not on any antihypertensives. His most recent lipid profile 2 weeks prior showed a total cholesterol level of 250 mg/dL, a TG level of 230 mg/dL, an LDL cholesterol of 174 mg/dL, and an HDL cholesterol of 30 mg/dL. He tells us that his father had a “heart attack” at the age of 52, and he would like to further understand his own risk. We calculate his ASCVD risk score, and it is 9.8%. 1. What constitutes a positive family history (FHx) of premature ASCVD? What is an approach to the art of soliciting the FHx from our patients? Definition of family history of premature ASCVD: the history of an atherosclerotic event (e.g., myocardial infarction or stroke) in a male first degree relative before the age of 55 or a female first degree relative before the age of 65. Dr. Navar’s approach to soliciting a family history:Lead with a general question such as “what do you know about any medical conditions that run in your family?”.Then ask more specific questions about the parents and siblings, such as “Is your mother still alive? How long did she live? Has she ever had a heart attack or stroke?”If the answer is yes, ask about how old they were at the time of the event.A challenging aspect of the FHx can be eliciting the difference between atherosclerotic events and sudden cardiac death. While atherosclerotic diseases are a much more common cause of unexplained sudden death, it's important that we don't miss the opportunity to identify inherited cardiomyopathies, channelopathies, inherited aortopathies or other heritable SCD syndromes. 2. Is the “dose” of family history important (for example: the number of affected relatives, the closeness of those relationships, the age of onset)? While conducting studies to test this may be difficult, the few studies that have looked at the number of affected relatives have found a dose-response type relationship, where increasing number of relatives affected increases the risk of heart disease.1,2 3. How does a family history affect cardiovascular risk stratification? FHx of premature ASCVD does not improve the predictive ability of the Pooled Cohort Equations (PCE) at a population level. Therefore, it does not factor into the ASCVD risk calculation utilizing the PCE. However, it enhances the patient’s risk at an individual level. The ACC/AHA guidelines recognize FHx of premature ASCVD as a risk-enhancing factor [together with CKD, chronic inflammatory conditions such as psoriasis, primary hypercholesterolemia, high-risk ethnicity such as South Asian ancestry...
undefined
30 snips
May 24, 2022 • 45min

209. CardioNerds Rounds: Challenging Cases – Modern Guideline Directed Therapy in Heart Failure with Dr. Randall Starling

It’s another session of CardioNerds Rounds! In these rounds, Co-Chairs, Dr. Karan Desai and Dr. Natalie Stokes and Dr. Tiffany Dong (FIT at Cleveland Clinic) joins Dr. Randall Starling (Professor of Medicine and Director of Heart Transplant and Mechanical Circulatory Support at Cleveland Clinic) to discuss the nuances of guideline directed medical therapy (GDMT) through real cases. As a past president of the Heart Failure Society of America (HFSA) and author on several guidelines, Dr. Starling gives us man pearls on GDMT. Come round with us today by listening to the episodes and joining future sessions of #CardsRounds! This episode is supported with unrestricted funding from Zoll LifeVest. A special thank you to Mitzy Applegate and Ivan Chevere for their production skills that help make CardioNerds Rounds such an amazing success. All CardioNerds content is planned, produced, and reviewed solely by CardioNerds. Case details are altered to protect patient health information. CardioNerds Rounds is co-chaired by Dr. Karan Desai and Dr. Natalie Stokes.  Speaker disclosures: None Cases discussed and Show Notes • References • Production Team CardioNerds Rounds PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Show notes - CardioNerds Rounds: Challenging Cases - Modern Guideline Directed Therapy in Heart Failure with Dr. Randall Starling Case #1 Synopsis: A man in his 60s with known genetic MYPBC3 cardiomyopathy and heart failure with a reduced ejection fraction of 30% presents with worsening dyspnea on exertion over the past 6 months. His past medical history also included atrial fibrillation with prior ablation and sick sinus syndrome with pacemaker implantation. Medications are listed below. He underwent an elective right heart catheterization prior to defibrillator upgrade for primary prevention. At the time of right heart catheterization, his blood pressure was 153/99 with a heart rate of 60. His RHC demonstrated a RA pressure of 15mmHg, RV 52/16, PA 59/32 (mean 41), and PCWP 28 with Fick CO/CI of 2.8 L/min and index of 1.2 L/min/m2. His SVR  was 1900 dynes/s/cm-5. He was admitted to the cardiac ICU and started on nitroprusside that was transitioned to a regimen of Sacubitril-Valsartan and Eplerenone. His final RHC numbers were RA 7, PA 46/18/29, PCWP 16 and Fick CO/CI 6.1/2.6. His discharge medications are shown below. Takeaways from Case #1 Unless there are contraindications (cardiogenic shock or AV block), continue a patient’s home beta blocker to maintain the neurohormonal blockade benefits. A low cardiac index should be interpreted in the full context of the patient, including their symptoms, other markers of perfusion (e.g., urine output, mentation, serum lactate), and mean arterial pressure before holding or stopping beta blockade. Carvedilol, metoprolol succinate and bisoprolol are all evidence-based options for beta blockers in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.If there is concern of lowering blood pressure too much with Sacubitril/Valsartan, one method is to trial low dose of valsartan first and then transition to Sac/Val. Note, in the PARADIGM-HF trial, the initial exclusion criteria for starting Sac/Val included no symptomatic hypotension and SBP ≥ 100. At subsequent up-titration visits, the blood pressure criteria was decreased to SBP ≥ 95.In multiple studies, protocol-driven titration of GDMT has shown to improve clinical outcomes, yet titration remains poor. The following image from Greene et al. in JACC shows that in contemporary US outpatient practices that GDMT titration is poor with few patients reaching target dosing. Case #2 Synopsis: A 43 year-old male with a past medical history of familial dilated cardiomyopathy requiring HVAD placement two years prior now comes in with low flow alarms.
undefined
15 snips
May 20, 2022 • 39min

208. Atrial Fibrillation: Epidemiology, Health Equity, & The Double Paradox with Dr. Larry Jackson

Atrial fibrillation may reach pandemic proportions in the next 2-3 decades. Factors that drive this phenomenon have been studied in predominantly White populations, leading to a significant underrepresentation of certain racial/ethnic groups in atrial fibrillation epidemiological studies. Most atrial fibrillation epidemiology studies suggest that the non-Hispanic Black population has a lower incidence/prevalence of atrial fibrillation, despite a higher risk factor burden (“Afib paradox”). At the same time, non-Hispanic Blacks have worse outcomes compared to the White population and underrepresented populations and women are less likely than White men to receive optimal guideline-based therapies for atrial fibrillation. In this episode, CardioNerds Dr. Kelly Arps (Co-Chair Atrial Fibrillation series, Cardiology fellow at Duke University), Dr. Colin Blumenthal (Co-Chair Atrial Fibrillation series, CardioNerds Academy House Faculty Leader for House Jones, Cardiology fellow at the University of Pennsylvania), and Dr. Dinu-Valentin Balanescu (CardioNerds Academy Faculty for House Jones, rising internal medicine chief resident at Beaumont Hospital), discuss with Dr. Larry Jackson (cardiac electrophysiologist and Vice Chief of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Division of Cardiology at Duke University) about atrial fibrillation epidemiology and health equity, challenges and possible solutions to improving diversity in clinical trials, and race/ethnicity/sex/gender differences in the detection, management, and outcomes of atrial fibrillation. Audio editing by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student doctor Akiva Rosenzveig. This CardioNerds Atrial Fibrillation series is a multi-institutional collaboration made possible by contributions of stellar fellow leads and expert faculty from several programs, led by series co-chairs, Dr. Kelly Arps and Dr. Colin Blumenthal. This series is supported by an educational grant from the Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer Alliance. All CardioNerds content is planned, produced, and reviewed solely by CardioNerds. We have collaborated with VCU Health to provide CME. Claim free CME here! Disclosure: Larry R. Jackson II, MD, MHs, has the following relevant financial relationships:Advisor or consultant for: Biosense Webster Inc.Speaker or a member of a speakers bureau for: Biotronik Inc.; Medtronic Inc. Pearls • Notes • References • Guest Profiles • Production Team CardioNerds Atrial Fibrillation PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Pearls and Quotes - Atrial Fibrillation: Epidemiology, Health Equity, & The Double Paradox Atrial fibrillation confers an enormous public health burden. It is estimated that it will reach pandemic proportions over the next 30 years, with potentially 100-180 million people worldwide suffering from this condition.Large epidemiological atrial fibrillation registries have very small populations of underrepresented groups. More diverse enrollment in clinical trials is essential and may be obtained by increasing diversity among research staff, principal investigators, and steering committees, and use of mobile/telehealth technologies to remove bias related to differences in presentation. The CardioNerds Clinical Trials Network specifically aims pair equitable trial enrollment with trainee personal and professional development.Most atrial fibrillation epidemiology studies suggest that the non-Hispanic Black population has lower incidence/prevalence of atrial fibrillation, despite higher risk factor burden. This “paradox” is likely due to a multifactorial process, with clinical differences, socioeconomic factors, and genetic factors contributing.Underrepresented populations are less likely than White patients to receive optimal guideline-based management of atrial fibrillation.
undefined
May 16, 2022 • 54min

207. Lipids: REDUCE-IT Versus STRENGTH Trials – EPA in Clinical Practice with Dr. Peter Toth

CardioNerds Tommy Das (Program Director of the CardioNerds Academy and cardiology fellow at Cleveland Clinic), Rick Ferraro (cardiology fellow at the Johns Hopkins Hospital), and Dr. Aliza Hussain (cardiology fellow at Baylor College Medicine) take a deep dive on the REDUCE-IT trial with Dr. Peter Toth, director of preventive cardiology at the CGH medical center in Sterling, Illinois, clinical professor in family and community medicine at the University of Illinois School of Medicine, and past president of the National Lipid Association and the American Board of Clinical Lipidology.  Special introduction to CardioNerds Clinical Trialist Dr. Jeff Wang (Emory University). Audio editing by CardioNerds academy intern, Shivani Reddy. This episode is part of the CardioNerds Lipids Series which is a comprehensive series lead by co-chairs Dr. Rick Ferraro and Dr. Tommy Das and is developed in collaboration with the American Society For Preventive Cardiology (ASPC). Relevant disclosures: None Pearls • Notes • References • Guest Profiles • Production Team CardioNerds Cardiovascular Prevention PageCardioNerds Episode PageCardioNerds AcademyCardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal ClubSubscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter!Check out CardioNerds SWAG!Become a CardioNerds Patron! Pearls - REDUCE-IT The Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with EPA-Intervention Trial (REDUCE-IT) trial was a large randomized controlled trial that showed a significant reduction in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events with use of icosapent ethyl ester in secondary prevention patients and high risk primary prevention patients with diabetes and residual elevated triglycerides between 135 to 499 mg/dL on top of maximally tolerated statin therapy1. Despite the use of high intensity statin therapy, considerable residual risk for future atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease exists in patients with ASCVD.Elevated triglycerides (TGs) are an important marker of increased residual ASCVD risk2.There are two primary types of Omega-3 fish oils: eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). Omege-3 fish oils have been shown to lower triglyceride levels.Low-dose combination EPA and DHA has not exhibited incremental cardiovascular benefit in either primary prevention and secondary prevention patients on top of statin therapy3-5.REDUCE-IT showed the use of high dose EPA in patients with either ASCVD or DM and one additional risk factor, and relatively well-controlled LDL-C levels on maximally tolerated statin therapy and residual hypertriglyceridemia (TG 135-499 mg/dL) results in significant reductions in cardiovascular events over a median follow-up period of 4.9 years1. Show notes - REDUCE-IT Multiple epidemiologic and Mendelian randomization studies have established elevated triglyceride (TG) levels as an important risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular events6-8. However previous clinical trials using TG-lowering medication such as niacin, fibrates and low dose omega-3 fish oil have not shown to reduce cardiovascular events when added to statin therapy in patients with or without ASCVD,9,10.The JELIS trial first demonstrated a significant reduction in cardiovascular events when 1.8g daily of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) was added to low-intensity statin therapy in patients with ASCVD and hypercholesterolemia, However, the trial was limited due to open label design without placebo, use of low doses of background statin therapy, and geographic/demographic limitations to participants in Japan11.In a large international multicenter randomized controlled trial, the Reduction of Cardiovascular Events with Icosapent Ethyl–Intervention Trial (REDUCE-IT) randomized 8,179 patients with established atherosclerotic heart disease or diabetes and an additional risk factor, on maximally tolerated statin therapy, to 4 gm/day of icosapent ethyl (a highly purified and stable EPA ethyl ester) or miner...
undefined
May 13, 2022 • 10min

206. Guidelines: 2021 ESC Cardiovascular Prevention – Question #12 with Dr. Laurence Sperling

Dr. Laurence Sperling discusses the inconsistent placement of referrals and enrollment in cardiac rehabilitation programs. They highlight the European Society of Cardiology's chosen threshold of effectiveness and strategies to enhance participation. The speakers emphasize the benefits of cardiac rehabilitation as a comprehensive risk reduction program and advocate for improved access through new care models.
undefined
May 12, 2022 • 8min

205. Guidelines: 2021 ESC Cardiovascular Prevention – Question #11 with Dr. Eugenia Gianos

Dr. Eugenia Gianos, director of the Women’s Heart Program at Lenox Hill Hospital, discusses the management of a 70-year-old man with multiple comorbidities and a prior NSTEMI. Topics include appropriate duration of dual antiplatelet therapy, the use of low dose river oxaben in clinical practice, and individualized decision-making based on patient risk factors.
undefined
May 11, 2022 • 9min

204. Guidelines: 2021 ESC Cardiovascular Prevention – Question #10 with Dr. Eileen Handberg

Dr. Eileen Handberg discusses the ESC guidelines for LDL-C levels in a patient with coronary artery disease. The recommended goal LDLC level is <55mg/dL. They explore the importance of lower LDL cholesterol levels and high potency statin prescriptions for improved cardiovascular outcomes.
undefined
May 10, 2022 • 12min

203. Guidelines: 2021 ESC Cardiovascular Prevention – Question #9 with Dr. Noreen Nazir

The following question refers to Section 4.3 of the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines. The question is asked by Dr. Maryam Barkhordarian, answered first by pharmacy resident Dr. Anushka Tandon, and then by expert faculty Dr. Noreen Nazir. Dr. Noreen Nazir is Assistant Professor of Clinical Medicine at the University of Illinois at Chicago, where she is the director of cardiac MRI and the preventive cardiology program. The CardioNerds Decipher The Guidelines Series for the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines represents a collaboration with the ACC Prevention of CVD Section, the National Lipid Association, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association. Question #9 Mr. A is a 28-year-old man who works as an accountant in what he describes as a “desk job” setting. He shares that life got “a little off-track” for him in 2020 between the COVID-19 pandemic and a knee injury. His 2022 New Years’ resolution is to improve his overall cardiovascular and physical health. He has hypertension and a family history of premature ASCVD in his father, who died of a heart attack at age 50. Prior to his knee injury, he went to the gym 3 days a week for 1 hour at a time, split between running on the treadmill and weightlifting. He has not returned to the gym since his injury and has been largely sedentary, although he is trying to incorporate a 20-minute daily walk into his routine. Which of the following exercise-related recommendations is most appropriate? A. A target of 75-150 minutes of vigorous-intensity or 150-300 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic physical exercise weekly is recommended to reduce all-cause mortality, CV mortality, and morbidity. B. Bouts of exercise less than 30 minutes are not associated with favorable health outcomes. C. Exercise efforts should be focused on aerobic activity, since only this type of activity is associated with mortality and morbidity benefits. D. Light-intensity aerobic activity like walking is expected to have limited health benefits for persons with predominantly sedentary behavior at baseline. Answer #9 The correct answer is A. There is an inverse relationship between moderate-to-vigorous physical activity and CV morbidity/mortality, all-cause mortality, and incidence of type 2 diabetes, with additional benefits accrued for exercise beyond the minimum suggested levels. The recommendation to “strive for at least 150-300 min/week of moderate-intensity, or 75-150 min/week of vigorous-intensity aerobic physical activity, or an equivalent combination thereof” is a Class 1 recommendation per the 2021 ESC guidelines, and a very similar recommendation (at least 75 minutes of vigorous-intensity or 150 minutes of moderate-intensity activity) is also Class 1 recommendation per 2019 ACC/AHA primary prevention guidelines. Both the ESC and ACC/AHA provide examples of activities grouped by absolute intensity (the amount of energy expended per minute of activity), but the ESC guidelines also offer suggestions for measuring the relative intensity of an activity (maximum/peak associated effort) in Table 7, which allows for a more individualized, customizable approach to setting activity goals. Importantly, individuals who are unable to meet minimum weekly activity recommendations should still be encouraged to stay as active as their abilities and health conditions allow to optimize cardiovascular and overall health. Choice B is incorrect, as data suggests physical activity episodes of any duration, including <10 min, are associated with favorable outcomes like all-cause mortality benefit. The duration of a single exercise bout is less correlated with health benefits than the total physical activity time accumulated per week. Choice C is incorrect. Per the ESC guidelines, it is a class 1 recommendation to perform resistance exercise, in addition to aerobic activity, on 2 or more days per week to reduce all-cause mortality. Data indicate that the addition of resistance exercise to aerobic activity is assoc...
undefined
8 snips
May 9, 2022 • 9min

202. Guidelines: 2021 ESC Cardiovascular Prevention – Question #8 with Dr. Eugene Yang

This question refers to Sections 3.1 of the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines. The question is asked by CardioNerds Academy Intern, student Dr. Hirsh Elhence, answered first by internal medicine resident at Beaumont Hospital and soon to be Mayo Clinic cardiology fellow and Dr. Teodora Donisan and then by expert faculty Dr. Eugene Yang.Dr. Yang is professor of medicine of the University of Washington where he is medical director of the Eastside Specialty Center and the co-Director of the Cardiovascular Wellness and Prevention Program. Dr. Yang is former Governor of the ACC Washington Chapter and current chair of the ACC Prevention of CVD Section.The CardioNerds Decipher The Guidelines Series for the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines represents a collaboration with the ACC Prevention of CVD Section, the National Lipid Association, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association. Question #8 Please read the following patient vignettes and choose the FALSE statement.A. A 39-year-old man who comes for a regular physical, has normal vitals and weight, denies any significant past medical or family history – does not need systematic cardiovascular disease (CVD) assessment.B. A 39-year-old woman who comes for a regular physical, has normal vitals and weight, and has a history of radical hysterectomy (no other significant past medical or family history) – could benefit from systematic or opportunistic CVD assessment.C. A 39-year-old woman who comes for a regular physical, has normal vitals except for a BMI of 27 kg/m2 and a family history of hypertension – requires a systematic global CVD assessment.D. A 39-year-old man who comes for a regular physical, has normal vitals and weight, and has a personal history of type I diabetes – requires a systematic global CVD assessment. Answer #8 The correct answer is C.Option A is an accurate statement, as systematic CVD risk assessment is not recommended in men < 40 years-old and women < 50 years-old, if they have no known cardiovascular (CV) risk factors. (Class III, level C)Option B is an accurate statement, as this patient had a radical hysterectomy, which means the ovaries have been removed as well and she is considered postmenopausal. Systematic or opportunistic CV risk assessment can be considered in men > 40 years-old and women > 50 years-old or postmenopausal, even in the absence of known ASCVD risk factors. (Class IIb, level C)Option C is a false statement and thus the correct answer, as the recommendations for global screening in this patient are not as strong and would require shared decision making. Opportunistic screening of blood pressure can be considered in her, as she is at risk for developing hypertension. Blood pressure screening should be considered in adults at risk for the development of hypertension, such as those who are overweight or with a known family history of hypertension. (Class IIa, level B)Option D is an accurate statement, as systematic global CVD risk assessment is recommended in individuals with any major vascular risk factor (i.e., family history of premature CVD, familial hyperlipidemia, CVD risk factors such as smoking, arterial hypertension, DM, raised lipid level, obesity, or comorbidities increasing CVD risk). (Class I, level C)Additional learning points:Do you know the difference between opportunistic and systematic CVD screening?Opportunistic screening refers to screening without a predefined strategy when the patient presents for different reasons. This is an effective and recommended way to screen for ASCVD risk factors, although it is unclear if it leads to benefits in clinical outcomes.Systematic screening can be done following a clear strategy formally evaluating either the general population or targeted subpopulations (i.e., type 2 diabetics or patients with significant family history of CVD). Systematic screening results in improvements in risk factors but has no proven effect on CVD outcomes.
undefined
May 8, 2022 • 10min

201. Guidelines: 2021 ESC Cardiovascular Prevention – Question #7 with Dr. Wesley Milks

The following question refers to Section 3.4 of the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines. The question is asked by student Dr. Adriana Mares, answered first by early career preventive cardiologist Dr. Dipika Gopal, and then by expert faculty Dr. Michael Wesley Milks. Dr. Milks is a staff cardiologist and assistant professor of clinical medicine at the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center where he serves as the Director of Cardiac Rehabilitation and an associate program director of the cardiovascular fellowship. He specializes in preventive cardiology and is a member of the American College of Cardiology's Cardiovascular Disease Prevention Leadership Council. The CardioNerds Decipher The Guidelines Series for the 2021 ESC CV Prevention Guidelines represents a collaboration with the ACC Prevention of CVD Section, the National Lipid Association, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association. Question #7 While you are on holiday break visiting your family, your aunt pulls you aside during the family gathering to ask a few questions about your 70-year-old uncle. He has hypertension, hyperlipidemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and moderate chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. His medications include Fluticasone/Salmeterol, Tiotropium, Albuterol, Lisinopril, Simvastatin, and Metformin. She is very concerned about his risk for heart disease as he has never had his “heart checked out.” She asks if the presence of COPD increases his chance of having heart disease. Which of the following statements would best answer her question? A. Systemic inflammation and oxidative stress caused by COPD promote vascular remodeling and a paradoxical ‘anticoagulant’ state affecting all vasculature types. B. Although chronic COPD is associated with increased cardiovascular events, individual exacerbations have no impact on risk of cardiovascular events. C. Patients with mild-moderate COPD are 8-10x more likely to die from atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease than respiratory failure. D. Cardiovascular mortality increases proportionally with an increase in forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) Answer #7 The correct answer is C. Patients with mild-moderate COPD are 8-10x more likely to die from atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease than respiratory failure. Patients with COPD have a 2-3-fold increased risk of CV events compared to age-matched controls even when adjusted for tobacco smoking, a shared risk factor. This can be partly explained by other common risk factors including aging, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and low physical activity. Interestingly, CVD mortality increases proportionally with a decrease (rather than increase) in FEV1, making answer choice D wrong (28% increase CVD mortality for every 10% decrease in FEV1). Additionally, COPD exacerbations and related infections are associated with a 4x increase in CVD events, making answer choice B incorrect. COPD has several effects on the vasculature which creates a ‘procoagulant’ not ‘anticoagulant’ effect on all vascular beds. This is associated with increased risk of cognitive impairment due to cerebral microvascular damage as well as increased risk of ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke. Main Takeaway The presence of COPD (even mild to moderate) has a significant impact on the incidence of non-fatal coronary events, stroke, and cardiovascular mortality mediated by inherent disease process and progression, risk factors (smoking, aging, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia), and systemic inflammation altering vasculature creating a ‘procoagulant’ effect. The ESC gives a Class I indication (LOE C) to investigate for ASCVD and ASCVD risk factors in patients with COPD. Guideline Location 3.4.5, Page 3264. CardioNerds Decipher the Guidelines - 2021 ESC Prevention Series CardioNerds Episode Page CardioNerds Academy Cardionerds Healy Honor Roll CardioNerds Journal Club Subscribe to The Heartbeat Newsletter! Check out CardioNerds SWAG! Become a CardioNerds Patron!

The AI-powered Podcast Player

Save insights by tapping your headphones, chat with episodes, discover the best highlights - and more!
App store bannerPlay store banner
Get the app