Abstract
Aim
To assess the level of secondary prevention and the outcome of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients who have a history of non-coronary vascular intervention.
Background
Patients with polyvascular disease have been reported to receive less evidence-based medications, with worse risk factor control and to be at higher risk than patients with single-bed disease. It is unknown whether these findings remain valid in the modern era of secondary prevention.
Methods
We included 4184 patients with stable CAD. Two groups were formed according to the absence (n = 3704) or presence (n = 480) of a history of non-coronary vascular intervention. Treatments and risk factor control were recorded at inclusion. Follow-up was performed after 2 years.
Results
Antiplatelets, angiotensin system antagonists, beta-blockers and statins were widely prescribed in both groups. The number of antihypertensive drugs was higher in patients with non-coronary vascular intervention. Except for slight increases in the rate of current smokers and in systolic blood pressure, risk factor control was similar between groups. All-cause and cardiovascular mortality rates were higher in patients with non-coronary intervention with adjusted HR of 1.55 (1.13–2.13) (p = 0.007), and 1.98 (1.24–3.15) (p = 0.004), respectively.
Conclusions
In modern practice and real life conditions, the higher risk of CAD patients with a history of non-coronary vascular intervention is taken into account, with more intense secondary prevention and similar risk factor control than patients without such history. In spite of the level of secondary prevention, patients with a history of non-coronary vascular intervention remain at high risk of cardiovascular events. This should be an incentive to discuss more stringent objectives for secondary prevention in patients with polyvascular disease.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.