ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020
The Impact of the 2019 European Guideline for Cardiovascular Risk Management: A Cross-Sectional Study in General Practice.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-Effectiveness, Burden of Disease and Budget Impact of Inclisiran: Dynamic Cohort Modelling of a Real-World Population with Cardiovascular Disease.PharmacoEconomics · 2022Pooled it
- Lipid-lowering therapy in Switzerland: time trends in utilization and cost, 2015-2023.Lipids in health and disease · 2025Article
- Involvement of Lipids and Lipid Mediators in Inflammation and Atherogenesis.Current medicinal chemistry · 2025Review
- LOGAN-CV: A Prospective Study of a Multifaceted Intervention Targeting United States Clinicians to Improve Guideline-Based Management of Lipid-Lowering Therapy.Advances in therapy · 2024Article
- Achievement of LDL-Cholesterol Goals in Patients Receiving LLT in Primary Care: TERESA-AP Study: LDL-Cholesterol Goals in Primary Care.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 2024Observational
- Cardiovascular Risk in Patients with Dyslipidemia and Their Degree of Control as Perceived by Primary Care Physicians in a Survey-TERESA-Opinion Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Involvement of Fatty Acids and Their Metabolites in the Development of Inflammation in Atherosclerosis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Real-world Evidence for Adherence and Persistence with Atorvastatin Therapy.Cardiology and therapy · 2021Review
- Diversity of Lipid Function in Atherogenesis: A Focus on Endothelial Mechanobiology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Guideline Concordance of Statin Treatment Decisions: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess the impact of the 2019 published European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Atherosclerosis Society (EAS) guideline on cardiovascular (CV) risk management compared with its predecessor from 2016 in a cohort in general practice. We performed a cross-sectional retrospective study with data from electronic medical records. The study cohort included 103,351 patients with known CV risk. We assessed changes in CV risk classification and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target values, the impact on LDL-C achievement rates, and the current lipid-lowering treatments. Under the 2019 ESC guideline, CV risk categories changed in 27.5% of patients, LDL-C target levels decreased in 71.4% of patients, and LDL-C target achievement rate dropped from 31.1% to 16.5%. Among non-achievers according to the 2019 guideline, 52.2% lacked lipid-lowering drugs entirely, and 41.5% had conventional drugs at a submaximal intensity. Of patients in the high-risk and very high-risk categories, at least 5% failed to achieve the LDL-C target level despite treatment at maximal intensity with conventional lipid-lowering drugs, making them eligible for PCSK-9 inhibitors. In conclusion, the 2019 ESC/EAS guideline lowered LDL-C target values for the majority of patients in general practice and halved LDL-C target achievement rates. There is still a large undeveloped potential to lower CV risk by introducing conventional lipid-lowering drugs, particularly in patients at high or very high CV risk. A substantial proportion of the patients can only achieve their LDL-C targets using PCSK-9 inhibitors, which would currently require an at least 10-fold increase in prescribing of these drugs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.