Evidence mapPaperPMID 36747449Full record

ArticleAnatolian journal of cardiology2023

How Did the Updated 2019 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society Risk Categorization for Patients with Diabetes Affect the Risk Perception and Lipid Goals? A Simulated Analysis of Real-life Data from EPHESUS Study.

Özcan Başaran, Volkan Doğan, Kadir Uğur Mert, Bülent Özlek, Eda Özlek, Oğuzhan Çelik, Cem Çil, İbrahim Halil Özdemir, İbrahim Rencüzoğulları, Fatma Özpamuk Karadeniz and 19 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Anatolian journal of cardiology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

29 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Özcan BaşaranDepartment of Cardiology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla,Türkiye.
Volkan DoğanDepartment of Cardiology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla,Türkiye.
Kadir Uğur MertDepartment of Cardiology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla,Türkiye.
Bülent ÖzlekDepartment of Cardiology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla,Türkiye.
Eda ÖzlekDepartment of Cardiology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla,Türkiye.
Oğuzhan ÇelikDepartment of Cardiology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla,Türkiye.
Cem ÇilDepartment of Cardiology, Eskişehir Osmangazi University Faculty of Medicine, Eskişehir, Türkiye.
İbrahim Halil ÖzdemirDepartment of Cardiology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla,Türkiye.
İbrahim RencüzoğullarıDepartment of Cardiology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla,Türkiye.
Fatma Özpamuk KaradenizDepartment of Cardiology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla,Türkiye.
Mehmet TekinalpDepartment of Cardiology, Level Hospital, Zonguldak, Türkiye.
Lütfü AşkınDepartment of Cardiology, Manisa City Hospital, Manisa, Türkiye.
Selami DemirelliDepartment of Cardiology, Kafkas University Faculty of Medicine, Kars, Türkiye.
Erkan GencerDepartment of Cardiology, Büyükşehir Hospital, Konya, Türkiye.
Lütfü BekarDepartment of Cardiology, Necip Fazıl State Hospital, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye.
Müjdat AktaşDepartment of Cardiology, Adıyaman University Training and Research Hospital, Adıyaman, Türkiye.
Mübariz Murat ResulzadeDepartment of Cardiology, Kayseri City Hospital, Kayseri, Türkiye.
Macit KalçıkDepartment of Cardiology, Necip Fazıl State Hospital, Kahramanmaraş, Türkiye.
Gökhan AksanDepartment of Cardiology, Şanlıurfa Mehmet Akif İnan Training and Research Hospital, Şanlıurfa, Türkiye.
Göksel ÇinierDepartment of Cardiology, Hitit University Faculty of Medicine, Çorum, Türkiye.
Kadriye Halil AkayDepartment of Cardiology, Arnavutköy State Hospital, İstanbul, Türkiye.
Nihat PekelDepartment of Cardiology, Private Yüzyıl Hospital, İstanbul, Türkiye.
Gurbet Özge MertDepartment of Cardiology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla,Türkiye.
Utku ŞenolDepartment of Cardiology, Hitit University Faculty of Medicine, Çorum, Türkiye.
Vahit DemirDepartment of Cardiology, Samsun Training and Research Hospital, Samsun, Türkiye.
Sinan İnciDepartment of Cardiology, Siyami Ersek Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Türkiye.
Emir DervişDepartment of Cardiology, Kocaeli State Hospital, Kocaeli, Türkiye.
Murat BitekerDepartment of Cardiology, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla,Türkiye.
Meral KayıkçıoğluDepartment of Cardiology, Tekden Private Hospital, Denizli, Türkiye.
Muğla University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe recent 2019 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society practice guidelines introduced a new risk categorization for patients with diabetes. We aimed to compare the implications of the 2016 and 2019 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society guidelines with regard to the lipid-lowering treatment use, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal attainment rates, and the estimated proportion of patients who would be at goal in an ideal setting.

methodsPatients with diabetes were classified into 4 risk categories according to 2019 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society dyslipidemia guidelines from the database of EPHESUS (cross-sectional, observational, countrywide registry of cardiology outpatient clinics) study. The use of lipid-lowering treatment and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal attainment rates were then compared according to previous and new guidelines.

resultsThis analysis included a total of 873 diabetic adults. Half of the study population (53.8%) were on lipid-lowering treatment and almost one-fifth (19.1%) were on high-intensity statins. While low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goal was achieved in 19.5% and 7.5% of patients, 87.4% and 69.6% would be on target if their lipid-lowering treatment was intensified according to 2016 and 2019 European Society of Cardiology/European Atherosclerosis Society lipid guidelines, respectively. The new target <55 mg/dL could only be achieved in 2.2% and 8.1% of very high-risk primary prevention and secondary prevention patients, respectively.

conclusionThe control of dyslipidemia was extremely poor among patients with diabetes. The use of lipid-lowering treatment was not at the desired level, and high-intensity lipid-lowering treatment use was even lower. Our simulation model showed that the high-dose statin plus ezetimibe therapy would improve goal attainment; however, it would not be possible to get goals with this treatment in more than one-third of the patients.

Indexed as

AtherosclerosisCardiologyDiabetes MellitusDyslipidemiasHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsAdultCholesterol, LDLCross-Sectional StudiesGoalsHumansPerceptionCholesterol, LDLHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID36747449
PMCPMC9900409
OpenAlexW4318827072

What Socratic holds

Texttitle and abstract
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.