P Antiochos1, P Marques-Vidal2, G Waeber2, P Vollenweider2. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital of Lausanne (CHUV), Lausanne, Switzerland. Electronic address: panagiotis.antiochos@gmail.com. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital of Lausanne (CHUV), Lausanne, Switzerland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data from prospective cohorts describing dyslipidaemia prevalence and treatment trends are lacking. Using data from the prospective CoLaus study, we aimed to examine changes in serum lipid levels, dyslipidaemia prevalence and management in a population-based sample of Swiss adults. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cardiovascular risk was assessed using PROCAM. Dyslipidaemia and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target levels were defined according to the Swiss Group for Lipids and Atherosclerosis. Complete baseline and follow up (FU) data were available for n = 4863 subjects during mean FU time of 5.6 years. Overall, 32.1% of participants were dyslipidaemic at baseline vs 46.3% at FU (p < 0.001). During this time, lipid lowering medication (LLM) rates among dyslipidaemic subjects increased from 34.0% to 39.2% (p < 0.001). In secondary prevention, LLM rates were 42.7% at baseline and 53.2% at FU (p = 0.004). In multivariate analysis, LLM use among dyslipidaemic subjects, between baseline and FU, was positively associated with personal history of CVD, older age, hypertension, higher BMI and diabetes, while negatively associated with higher educational level. Among treated subjects, LDL-C target achievement was positively associated with diabetes and negatively associated with personal history of CVD and higher BMI. Among subjects treated at baseline, LLM discontinuation was negatively associated with older age, male sex, smoking, hypertension and parental history of CVD. CONCLUSIONS: In Switzerland, the increase over time in dyslipidaemia prevalence was not paralleled by a similar increase in LLM. In a real-life setting, dyslipidaemia management remains far from optimal, both in primary and secondary prevention.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Data from prospective cohorts describing dyslipidaemia prevalence and treatment trends are lacking. Using data from the prospective CoLaus study, we aimed to examine changes in serum lipid levels, dyslipidaemia prevalence and management in a population-based sample of Swiss adults. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cardiovascular risk was assessed using PROCAM. Dyslipidaemia and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) target levels were defined according to the Swiss Group for Lipids and Atherosclerosis. Complete baseline and follow up (FU) data were available for n = 4863 subjects during mean FU time of 5.6 years. Overall, 32.1% of participants were dyslipidaemic at baseline vs 46.3% at FU (p < 0.001). During this time, lipid lowering medication (LLM) rates among dyslipidaemic subjects increased from 34.0% to 39.2% (p < 0.001). In secondary prevention, LLM rates were 42.7% at baseline and 53.2% at FU (p = 0.004). In multivariate analysis, LLM use among dyslipidaemic subjects, between baseline and FU, was positively associated with personal history of CVD, older age, hypertension, higher BMI and diabetes, while negatively associated with higher educational level. Among treated subjects, LDL-C target achievement was positively associated with diabetes and negatively associated with personal history of CVD and higher BMI. Among subjects treated at baseline, LLM discontinuation was negatively associated with older age, male sex, smoking, hypertension and parental history of CVD. CONCLUSIONS: In Switzerland, the increase over time in dyslipidaemia prevalence was not paralleled by a similar increase in LLM. In a real-life setting, dyslipidaemia management remains far from optimal, both in primary and secondary prevention.