Consequences of diabetes and high-risk dyslipidemia

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction Diabetic patients develop both, microvascular and macrovascular long-term complications, and have double the risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease being the main cause of death. The 97% of diabetic patients are classified as...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of preventive cardiology 2023-05, Vol.30 (Supplement_1)
Hauptverfasser: Eliche Mozas, P, Cruz Romero, L, Cubillas Quero, A, Huertas Escribano, M J, Rus Mansilla, C, Cortez Quiroga, G A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: None. Introduction Diabetic patients develop both, microvascular and macrovascular long-term complications, and have double the risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease being the main cause of death. The 97% of diabetic patients are classified as high or very high CV risk. The 2019 ESC guidelines for the managment of dyslipidaemia, classified patients with LDL-c >190 mg/dL as high-risk patients, with the indication of high-intensity statins (LDLc reduction greater than 50% and LDLc below 70 mg/dL). Objective To analyze, in a group of patients with high risk dyslipidaemia (HRD, LDLc >190 mg/dL without secondary cause), the consecuences of its association with type 2 diabetes. Methods Observational retrospective cohort of 153 patients with HRD. We compared 35 diabetic patients (G1) vs 118 non diabetic patients (G2), and we analysed clinical characteristics, cardiovascular risk factor’s (CVRF), tase of cardiovascular disease, the baseline blood test with maximum LDL-c (BT1), lipid profile on the last blood test (BT2) and the effects of lipid-lowering treatment. Results There were no differences in relation to sex. G1 were older (69.2 (±12.8) vs 56.8 (±12.5) years old, p=0.001), had a higher body mass index (BMI) (31.4 (±5.9) vs 28.9 (±4.4) kg/m2, p=0.018), higher number of CVRF (3 CVRF, 54.3% vs 10.2%, p
ISSN:2047-4873
2047-4881
DOI:10.1093/eurjpc/zwad125.161