Abstract Background and Aims It has been reported that patients without standard modifiable cardiovascular (CV) risk factors (SMuRFs—diabetes, dyslipidaemia, hypertension, and smoking) presenting with first myocardial infarction (MI), especially women, have a higher in-hospital mortality than patients with risk factors, and possibly a lower long-term risk provided they survive the post-infarct period. This study aims to explore the long-term outcomes of SMuRF-less patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods CLARIFY is an observational cohort of 32 703 outpatients with stable CAD enrolled between 2009 and 2010 in 45 countries. The baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with and without SMuRFs were compared. The primary outcome was a composite of 5-year CV death or non-fatal MI. Secondary outcomes were 5-year all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE—CV death, non-fatal MI, or non-fatal stroke). Results Among 22 132 patients with complete risk factor and outcome information, 977 (4.4%) were SMuRF-less. Age, sex, and time since CAD diagnosis were similar across groups. SMuRF-less patients had a lower 5-year rate of CV death or non-fatal MI (5.43% [95% CI 4.08–7.19] vs. 7.68% [95% CI 7.30–8.08], P = 0.012), all-cause mortality, and MACE. Similar results were found after adjustments. Clinical event rates increased steadily with the number of SMuRFs. The benefit of SMuRF-less status was particularly pronounced in women. Conclusions SMuRF-less patients with stable CAD have a substantial but significantly lower 5-year rate of CV death or non-fatal MI than patients with risk factors. The risk of CV outcomes increases steadily with the number of risk factors.
Carotid artery endarterectomy (CAE) is a treatment of choice for symptomatic and asymptomatic high-grade carotid stenosis, showing great results in reducing stroke morbidity. The optimal technique of the arterial closure is, however, still under discussion, with both patch angioplasty and primary closure having numerous advantages and pitfalls. The definite evidence is still lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of the modified primary closure technique during CEA. Incidence of restenosis more than 8 months after the surgery was measured. A retrospective observational study to evaluate modified primary internal carotid artery closure was conducted in Republican Vilnius University Hospital from January 1st, 2014 to December 31st, 2018. The patients were enrolled in the trial during their routine follow-up by their surgeon. During the visit, after an informed consent was signed, a qualified investigator performed carotid duplex ultrasound scan, documenting the restenosis rates. Patients also filled in the comorbidity assessment questionnaire, which included their smoking habits, history of hypertension and their adherence to antihypertensive medication as well as cholesterol levels and statin therapy, additional related comorbidities. Out of 342 patients that underwent CAE with primary closure in the Republican Vilnius university hospital from 2014 to 2018, 42 patients were identified as deceased, therefore a follow-up was impossible. Out of planned 150 (50%) consequently selected patients, 125 gave an informed consent to be enrolled into the study. Out of those 6 pre-occlusions were established during the review of the patient medical data and therefore were excluded from the study. In general, we analyzed the data of 119 patients and 125 CAE with a modified primary suture closure. The mean follow-up time was 35.78 months (SE 0.992; SD 11,046). At the time of a follow up, 3 (2,4%) carotid artery occlusions were identified and promptly evaluated. Restenosis rates varied: 5,6% of patients had low grade (<50%), 5,6% had moderate grade (50-69%) and 1,6% had high grade (70-99%) stenosis. The modified lateral CAE with primary closure technique, used in our hospital’s contemporary practice has shown to be a promising alternative to the classical primary suture, due to reduced restenosis rates. More prospective and randomized studies are needed to evaluate this technique in comparison to other CAE closure techniques.