Time to Recovery in Diabetes and Comorbidities Following Hurricane Katrina

2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (S1) ◽  
pp. S33-S38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tina K. Thethi ◽  
C. Lillian Yau ◽  
Lizheng Shi ◽  
Sharice Leger ◽  
Prathima Nagireddy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Hurricane Katrina ◽  
Natural Disaster ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Low Density ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACTBackground:The impact of a natural disaster on self-care and health care delivery has been well documented. The objective of the study was to document the recovery pattern from the impact of a natural disaster such as Hurricane Katrina on clinical and biochemical measures of diabetes and its comorbidities.Methods:Patients were selected from Tulane University Hospital and Clinic, Southeast Louisiana Veterans Health Care System, and the Medical Center of Louisiana at New Orleans. Adults with diabetes and A1cmeasurement 6 months before (pre-K) Hurricane Katrina (February 28, 2005–August 27, 2005) and 6 to 16 months after (post-K) Katrina (March 1, 2006–December 31, 2006) were identified within the 3 facilities. Follow-up data (January 1, 2007–December 31, 2007) were 1 year after the first post-K visit. The outcome measures were hemoglobin A1c(HbA1c), systolic and diastolic blood pressure (BP), and lipids (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL], triglycerides).Results:Averaged across the 3 facilities, the parameters significantly different in the follow-up period compared with pre- and post-K were HbA1c(P= .04), HDL, and systolic and diastolic BP (P< .0001). Parameters with significantly different patterns of change in the 3 facilities over time were HbA1c, HDL, systolic and diastolic BP (P< .0001), and low-density lipoprotein (P< .01).Conclusions:Our results suggest that a variety of clinical and biochemical parameters related to diabetes and its comorbidities affected by natural disaster have varied the rate of recovery to predisaster levels.(Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2010;4:S33-S38)

scholarly journals Low density lipoprotein cholesterol and all-cause mortality rate: findings from a study on Japanese community-dwelling persons

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryuichi Kawamoto ◽  
Asuka Kikuchi ◽  
Taichi Akase ◽  
Daisuke Ninomiya ◽  
Teru Kumagi
Keyword(s):  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Community Dwelling ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Adjusted Relative Risk ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
All Cause Mortality

Abstract Background Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) independently impacts aging-related health outcomes and plays a critical role in cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). However, there are limited predictive data on all-cause mortality, especially for the Japanese community population. In this study, it was examined whether LDL-C is related to survival prognosis based on 7 or 10 years of follow-up. Methods Participants included 1610 men (63 ± 14 years old) and 2074 women (65 ± 12 years old) who participated in the Nomura cohort study conducted in 2002 (first cohort) and 2014 (second cohort) and who continued throughout the follow-up periods (follow-up rates: 94.8 and 98.0%). Adjusted relative risk estimates were obtained for all-cause mortality using a basic resident register. The data were analyzed by a Cox regression with the time variable defined as the length between the age at the time of recruitment and that at the end of the study (the age of death or censoring), and risk factors including gender, age, body mass index (BMI), presence of diabetes, lipid levels, renal function, serum uric acid levels, blood pressure, and history of smoking, drinking, and CVD. Results Of the 3684 participants, 326 (8.8%) were confirmed to be deceased. Of these, 180 were men (11.2% of all men) and 146 were women (7.0% of all women). Lower LDL-C levels, gender (male), older age, BMI under 18.5 kg/m2, and the presence of diabetes were significant predictors for all-cause mortality. Compared with individuals with LDL-C levels of 144 mg/dL or higher, the multivariable-adjusted Hazard ratio (and 95% confidence interval) for all-cause mortality was 2.54 (1.58–4.07) for those with LDL-C levels below 70 mg/dL, 1.71 (1.15–2.54) for those with LDL-C levels between 70 mg/dL and 92 mg/dL, and 1.21 (0.87–1.68) for those with LDL-C levels between 93 mg/dL and 143 mg/dL. This association was particularly significant among participants who were male (P for interaction = 0.039) and had CKD (P for interaction = 0.015). Conclusions There is an inverse relationship between LDL-C levels and the risk of all-cause mortality, and this association is statistically significant.

Abstract P43: Frequency and Predictors of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Control and Appropriate Response to Elevated LDL-C Levels in Patients with Cardiovascular Disease

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Salim S Virani ◽  
Lechauncy D Woodard ◽  
Supicha Sookanan ◽  
Cassie R Landrum ◽  
Tracy H Urech ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Medication Possession Ratio ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Lipid Lowering ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
To Receive

Background: Although current cholesterol performance measures define good quality as low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels < 100mg/dl in cardiovascular disease (CVD) patients, they provide a snap shot at one time point and do not inform whether an appropriate action was taken to manage elevated LDL-C levels. We assessed frequency and predictors of this appropriate response (AR). Methods: We used administrative data to assess 22,902 CVD patients receiving care in a Veterans Affairs network of 7 hospitals and affiliated clinics. We determined the proportion of CVD patients at LDL-C goal <100 mg/dl, and the proportion of patients with uncontrolled LDL-C levels (>100 mg/dl) who had an AR [defined as the initiation or dosage increase of a lipid lowering medication (LLM), addition of a new LLM, receipt of maximum dosage or >1 LLM, or LDL-C reading <100 mg/dl] at 45 days follow-up. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate facility, provider and patient characteristics associated with AR. Results: LDL-C levels were at goal in 16,350 (71.4%) patients. An additional 2,110 (9.2%) had an AR at 45 days of follow-up. Controlling for clustering between facilities and patient's illness severity, history of diabetes (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.03-1.35), hypertension (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.02-1.44), patients showing good medication adherence (medication possession ratio > 0.8) [OR 2.29, 95% CI 1.99-2.64] were associated with AR. Older CVD patients (age >75 years) were less likely to receive AR (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.52-0.70). Teaching vs. non-teaching facility (p=0.40), physician vs. non-physician provider (p=0.14), specialist vs. non-specialist primary care provider (p=0.12), and patient's race (p=0.12) were not predictors of AR. Conclusion: Among patients with CVD and LDL-C above guideline recommended levels, only one-third receive AR. Diabetic and hypertensive CVD patients are more likely to receive AR, whereas older Veterans with CVD receive AR less often likely reflecting providers' belief of lack of efficacy from treatment intensification in older CVD patients. Our findings are important for quality improvement and policy making initiatives as they provide more actionable information compared with isolated LDL-C goal attainment as a quality indicator.

Abstract 14430: Effect Modification of Statin Therapy on the Relationship of Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol With Incident CKD in Us Veterans

Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jui-Ting Hsiung ◽  
Maria Marroquin ◽  
Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Kidney Disease ◽  
Kidney Disease ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Us Veterans ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Statin Use

Background: Studies suggests that in the general population, hyperlipidemia may confer higher risk of developing chronic kidney disease (CKD). But, there is conflicting data as to whether statins can protect renal function or slow renal degradation. We sought to examine the impact of statins on the association of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL) and risk of incident CKD. Methods: Our cohort included 1,439,756 US veterans without chronic kidney disease (CKD), but with LDL measured between 2004-2006, who were followed until 2014. Incident CKD was defined as over 3 estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) measurements <60 mL/min/1.73m 2 at least 90 days apart. Patients with a statin prescription at the time of LDL measurement were identified. Cox models were used to estimate the associations between LDL with incident CKD. Model adjustments include demographics, comorbidities, smoking status, prescription of fibrate or niacin, body mass index, albumin, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides. Results: The cohort included 5% females, 16% African Americans, 26% diabetics, and 30% statin-users, with a mean age of 60±13 years. The median [IQR] of LDL and eGFR were 109 [88,133] mg/dL and 83 [72,94] mL/min/1.73m 2 , respectively. A J-shaped association between LDL and incident CKD were observed in both those on statin and not on a statin after adjustment. Low LDL (<70 mg/dL) was associated with a higher risk of incident CKD compared to the reference (LDL 70-<100 mg/dL) regardless of statin use. High LDL ≥160 mg/dL was associated with the highest of risks of incident CKD (HR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.13, and HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.12, for statin use and no statin use, respectively). Conclusion: Both high and low LDL were associated with higher incident CKD risk independent of statin use in this US veteran cohort. Further studies are needed to understand how to manage cardiovascular disease risk by lowering LDL while simultaneously reducing risk of CKD.

scholarly journals Low‐Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Corrected for Lipoprotein(a) Cholesterol, Risk Thresholds, and Cardiovascular Events

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (23) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Willeit ◽  
Calvin Yeang ◽  
Patrick M. Moriarty ◽  
Lena Tschiderer ◽  
Stephen A. Varvel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cardiovascular Disease ◽  
Clinical Care ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Density Lipoprotein ◽  
Cholesterol Content ◽  
Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Low Density ◽  
Low Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol ◽  
Lipoprotein A ◽  
The Impact

Background Conventional "low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C)" assays measure cholesterol content in both low‐density lipoprotein and lipoprotein(a) particles. To clarify the consequences of this methodological limitation for clinical care, our study aimed to compare associations of “LDL‐C” and corrected LDL‐C with risk of cardiovascular disease and to assess the impact of this correction on the classification of patients into guideline‐recommended LDL‐C categories. Methods and Results Lipoprotein(a) cholesterol content was estimated as 30% of lipoprotein(a) mass and subtracted from “LDL‐C” to obtain corrected LDL‐C values (LDL‐C corr30 ). Hazard ratios for cardiovascular disease (defined as coronary heart disease, stroke, or coronary revascularization) were quantified by individual‐patient‐data meta‐analysis of 5 statin landmark trials from the Lipoprotein(a) Studies Collaboration (18 043 patients; 5390 events; 4.7 years median follow‐up). When comparing top versus bottom quartiles, the multivariable‐adjusted hazard ratio for cardiovascular disease was significant for “LDL‐C” (1.17; 95% CI, 1.05–1.31; P =0.005) but not for LDL‐C corr30 (1.07; 95% CI, 0.93–1.22; P =0.362). In a routine laboratory database involving 531 144 patients, reclassification of patients across guideline‐recommended LDL‐C categories when using LDL‐C corr30 was assessed. In “LDL‐C” categories of 70 to <100, 100 to <130, 130 to <190, and ≥190 mg/dL, significant proportions (95% CI) of participants were reassigned to lower LDL‐C categories when LDL‐C corr30 was used: 30.2% (30.0%–30.4%), 35.1% (34.9%–35.4%), 32.9% (32.6%–33.1%), and 41.1% (40.0%–42.2%), respectively. Conclusions “ LDL‐C” was associated with incident cardiovascular disease only when lipoprotein(a) cholesterol content was included in its measurement. Refinement in techniques to accurately measure LDL‐C, particularly in patients with elevated lipoprotein(a) levels, is warranted to assign risk to the responsible lipoproteins.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document