ArticleEuropean heart journal. Case reports2025
The challenge of secondary cardiovascular prevention in very high Lipoprotein (a) level: a case report.
Article in European heart journal. Case reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: While advances in technology and procedural techniques have significantly improved outcomes post-PCI, two pharmacological strategies have gained particular attention for their effectiveness in reducing long-term cardiovascular (CV) risk: anti-platelet therapies and lipid-lowering therapies (LLT). The 10-year recurrence risk for major CV events remains as high as 10-30%, due to various pathophysiological pathways collectively known as residual risk (RR), even with optimal CV risk factor management after acute coronary syndrome (ACS). RR includes factors such as elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)], triglycerides, pro-thrombotic states, hyperglycemia, and persistent subclinical arterial inflammation. Aims: This case highlights the challenge of managing a patient with multiple recurrent cardiac ischaemic events and in-stent restenosis, despite good medical therapy and no other significant CV risk factors except for markedly elevated Lp(a) levels. Conclusion: Three critical aspects of daily practice emerge from our observation. First, Lp(a) is a valuable parameter for CV risk stratification in primary prevention. Second, measurement of Lp(a) post-CV event may provide valuable information on the risk of ischaemic recurrence, influencing decisions regarding long-term dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT). Finally, this case illustrates the importance of a multidisciplinary approach in managing patients with very high cardiovascular risk. Close collaboration between cardiologists and lipidologists facilitated the identification of a rare lipid disorder and the decision to pursue lipoprotein apheresis, an intensive but effective treatment option for lipid metabolism disorders lacking conventional medical therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.