Charles Delagardelle

First nationwide survey on cardiovascular risk factors in Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg (ORISCAV-LUX)

BackgroundThe ORISCAV-LUX study is the first baseline survey of an on-going cardiovascular health monitoring programme in Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg. The main objectives of the present manuscript were 1) to describe the study design and conduct, and 2) to present the salient outcomes of the study, in particular the prevalence of the potentially modifiable and treatable cardiovascular disease risk factors in the adult population residing in Luxembourg.MethodORISCAV-LUX is a cross-sectional study based on a random sample of 4496 subjects, stratified by gender, age categories and district, drawn from the national insurance registry of 18-69 years aged Luxembourg residents, assuming a response rate of 30% and a proportion of 5% of institutionalized subjects in each stratum. The cardiovascular health status was assessed by means of a self-administered questionnaire, clinical and anthropometric measures, as well as by blood, urine and hair examinations. The potentially modifiable and treatable risk factors studied included smoking, hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes mellitus, and obesity. Both univariate and multivariate statistical analyses used weighted methods to account for the stratified sampling scheme.ResultsA total of 1432 subjects took part in the survey, yielding a participation rate of 32.2%. This figure is higher than the minimal sample size of 1285 subjects as estimated by power calculation. The most predominant cardiovascular risk factors were dyslipidemia (69.9%), hypertension (34.5%), smoking (22.3%), and obesity (20.9%), while diabetes amounted 4.4%. All prevalence rates increased with age (except smoking) with marked gender differences (except diabetes). There was a significant difference in the prevalence of hypertension and of lipid disorders by geographic region of birth. The proportion of subjects cumulating two or more cardiovascular risk factors increased remarkably with age and was more predominant in men than in women (P<0.0001). Only 14.7% of men and 23.1% of women were free of any cardiovascular risk factor. High prevalence of non-treated CVRF, notably for hypertension and dyslipidemia, were observed in the study population.ConclusionThe population-based ORISCAV-LUX survey revealed a high prevalence of potentially modifiable and treatable cardiovascular risk factors among apparently healthy subjects; significant gender and age-specific differences were seen not only for single but also for combined risk factors. From a public health perspective, these preliminary findings stress the urgent need for early routine health examinations, preventive interventions and lifestyle behavioural changes, even in young asymptomatic adults, to decrease cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in Luxembourg.

High-Intensity Interval Training in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Background: Small studies have suggested that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) is superior to moderate continuous training (MCT) in reversing cardiac remodeling and increasing aerobic capacity in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The present multicenter trial compared 12 weeks of supervised interventions of HIIT, MCT, or a recommendation of regular exercise (RRE). Methods: Two hundred sixty-one patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ⩽35% and New York Heart Association class II to III were randomly assigned to HIIT at 90% to 95% of maximal heart rate, MCT at 60% to 70% of maximal heart rate, or RRE. Thereafter, patients were encouraged to continue exercising on their own. Clinical assessments were performed at baseline, after the intervention, and at follow-up after 52 weeks. Primary end point was a between-group comparison of change in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter from baseline to 12 weeks. Results: Groups did not differ in age (median, 60 years), sex (19% women), ischemic pathogenesis (59%), or medication. Change in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter from baseline to 12 weeks was not different between HIIT and MCT (P=0.45); left ventricular end-diastolic diameter changes compared with RRE were −2.8 mm (−5.2 to −0.4 mm; P=0.02) in HIIT and −1.2 mm (−3.6 to 1.2 mm; P=0.34) in MCT. There was also no difference between HIIT and MCT in peak oxygen uptake (P=0.70), but both were superior to RRE. However, none of these changes was maintained at follow-up after 52 weeks. Serious adverse events were not statistically different during supervised intervention or at follow-up at 52 weeks (HIIT, 39%; MCT, 25%; RRE, 34%; P=0.16). Training records showed that 51% of patients exercised below prescribed target during supervised HIIT and 80% above target in MCT. Conclusions: HIIT was not superior to MCT in changing left ventricular remodeling or aerobic capacity, and its feasibility remains unresolved in patients with heart failure. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00917046.

High Intensity Interval Training in Heart Failure Patients with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Background: Small studies have suggested that high-intensity interval training (HIIT) is superior to moderate continuous training (MCT) in reversing cardiac remodeling and increasing aerobic capacity in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The present multicenter trial compared 12 weeks of supervised interventions of HIIT, MCT, or a recommendation of regular exercise (RRE). Methods: Two hundred sixty-one patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ⩽35% and New York Heart Association class II to III were randomly assigned to HIIT at 90% to 95% of maximal heart rate, MCT at 60% to 70% of maximal heart rate, or RRE. Thereafter, patients were encouraged to continue exercising on their own. Clinical assessments were performed at baseline, after the intervention, and at follow-up after 52 weeks. Primary end point was a between-group comparison of change in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter from baseline to 12 weeks. Results: Groups did not differ in age (median, 60 years), sex (19% women), ischemic pathogenesis (59%), or medication. Change in left ventricular end-diastolic diameter from baseline to 12 weeks was not different between HIIT and MCT (P=0.45); left ventricular end-diastolic diameter changes compared with RRE were −2.8 mm (−5.2 to −0.4 mm; P=0.02) in HIIT and −1.2 mm (−3.6 to 1.2 mm; P=0.34) in MCT. There was also no difference between HIIT and MCT in peak oxygen uptake (P=0.70), but both were superior to RRE. However, none of these changes was maintained at follow-up after 52 weeks. Serious adverse events were not statistically different during supervised intervention or at follow-up at 52 weeks (HIIT, 39%; MCT, 25%; RRE, 34%; P=0.16). Training records showed that 51% of patients exercised below prescribed target during supervised HIIT and 80% above target in MCT. Conclusions: HIIT was not superior to MCT in changing left ventricular remodeling or aerobic capacity, and its feasibility remains unresolved in patients with heart failure. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00917046.

Level of Unawareness and Management of Diabetes, Hypertension, and Dyslipidemia among Adults in Luxembourg: Findings from ORISCAV-LUX Study

Background In the absence of evidence-based information, assessment of population awareness and management of diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidemia (treatable and preventable cardiovascular risk factors) are important to halt coronary and cerebrovascular diseases and to improve public health. Methods The analysis was based on a nationally representative sample of 1432 adult subjects, recruited for the ORISCAV-LUX survey (2007–2008). Descriptive and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. The 10-year Framingham risk score was calculated for each participant who classified at low, intermediate and high risk. Results Among the diagnosed cases, 32%, 60%, and 85% were respectively unaware of their diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidemia. Increasing age and BMI were the strongest protective factors against unawareness of hypertension and dyslipidemia. Having a family history decreased the risk of unawareness of hypertension (OR = 0.57; 95% CI 0.36, 0.92; P = 0.021), whereas, not having a family doctor increased double-fold the odd of being unaware of hypertension (P = 0.048). Poor health perception reduced significantly the risk of unawareness of dyslipidemia (OR = 0.27; 95% CI 0.11, 0.68). Concerning the management, diabetes was markedly better treated than hypertension and dyslipidemia. Among diabetic subjects (constituting 4% of the population), 3% were treated vs. 1% not treated. In contrast, 22% of the hypertensive participants (35% of the population) were not treated vs. 13% treated. Concerning dyslipidemia, only 9% of those with lipid disorder (70% of the population) were under medication vs. 61% not treated. For the treated cases of these pathologies, almost only one-third was under control. Framingham risk of developing CHD within 10 years was moderate to high among 62%, 27%, and 17% of the unaware/untreated diabetic, hypertensive, and dyslipidemic participants, respectively. Conclusion The considerable lack of awareness and insufficient management underscore the urgent need for intensive efforts to reduce the gap in prevention strategies, and control of cases according to explicit clinical guidelines.

Social inequality in awareness of cardiovascular risk factors in patients undergoing coronary angiography

Background: In order to improve their risk profile, individuals need to be aware of the existence of cardiovascular (CV) risk factors. The awareness of CV risk factors has not yet been studied in patients undergoing coronary angiography. Patients and Methods: A total of 4,500 patients undergoing coronary angiography were asked to complete a questionnaire before the procedure. The patients were asked about their economic status, their education, their source of health information and were also asked to name CV risk factors. Results: The prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) (87%) and CV risk factors was high. Hypertension and hypercholesterolemia were the two most common CV risk factors and were found in two thirds of the patients. There were significant differences in the awareness of risk factors across the different levels of education. Only 8% of the men and 7% of the women could cite at least three risk factors. This percentage ranged from 4% of the patients with primary level of education to 11% and 20% of the patients with secondary and university levels of education, respectively (p < 0.001). More than 1 out of 10 patients did not know any CV risk factor. Smoking and hypercholesterolemia were the best identified CV risk factors in contrast to diabetes and hypertension. The primary care physician was the major source of information across all levels of education. Conclusion: Awareness of CV risk factors is low in this high-risk population and associated with strong social inequalities. This information is alarming and will have to be addressed in order to improve outcomes in patients with CAD.

Isokinetic versus One-Repetition Maximum Strength Assessment in Chronic Heart Failure

PURPOSE Reduction in exercise capacity in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) has been partially attributed to decreased muscle strength. Training studies reported important variations in strength increases during rehabilitation, ranging between 5% and 70% and depending on the measurement technique: isokinetic dynamometry or the one-repetition maximum (1RM) methods. Therefore, the question arises if both techniques assess the changes in muscle strength in a comparable way. METHODS Thirty patients with CHF, New York Heart Association class II-III, with mean baseline VO2peak of 14.8 +/-3.0 mL x kg(-1) x min(-1) and mean baseline left ventricular ejection fraction of 23.5% T 5.5%, were assessed for knee extensor and knee flexor strength before and after 40 training sessions by isokinetic dynamometry and 1RM method. These two strength measurement techniques were compared using the Bland and Altman method for agreement. RESULTS Knee extensor muscle strength increased by 7.4% and knee flexor strength increased by 18.7% if measured by isokinetic testing. With the 1RM method, knee extensor and flexor strength increased by 36% and 100%, respectively. Both techniques were not in agreement for muscle strength assessment; improvements were more important with the 1RM method. Furthermore, statistical analysis showed that the 1RM technique was overestimating strength increases in comparison with isokinetic evaluation, especially for higher strength levels. CONCLUSIONS In the follow-up of exercise training programs in patients with CHF, isokinetic measurements should be preferentially used to limit bias between measurements at different times.

Cardiovascular health: a cross-national comparison between the Maine Syracuse Study (Central New York, USA) and ORISCAV-LUX (Luxembourg)

BackgroundCardiovascular disease is the number one cause of death in the United States and in most European countries. Cardiovascular health, as defined by the American Heart Association, is comprised of seven health metrics (smoking, body mass index, physical activity, diet, total cholesterol, blood pressure, and fasting plasma glucose). No studies have compared US data with data collected elsewhere, using this index of cardiovascular healthMethodsWe performed comparative analyses of cardiovascular health status in participants from 2 study sites in 2 different countries: the Maine-Syracuse Study, conducted in Central New York, USA in 2001–2006 (n = 673), and the Observation of Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Luxembourg, conducted in 2007–2009 (n = 1145).ResultsThe Cardiovascular Health Score, the sum of the total number of metrics at ideal levels, was higher in the Luxembourg site than in the Central New York site. Ideal cardiovascular health levels for body mass index, smoking, physical activity, and diet were more prevalent in the Luxembourg site than the Central New York site. Ideal levels for blood pressure were more prevalent in Central New York. Differences between the two sites remained with control for age, gender and socioeconomic indicators.ConclusionsCardiovascular health, as indexed by seven health metrics, was higher in the European study site than in the US study site. The largest differences were for the four lifestyle/behavior metrics, namely body mass index, smoking, physical activity, and diet. Preventative and intervention strategies will continue to be important for both countries in order to improve cardiovascular health.

Reverse remodelling through exercise training is more pronounced in non-ischemic heart failure

PurposeMost training studies in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF) do not consider CHF aetiology in the interpretation of the results. About 60% of the patients in those studies have ischemic CHF (IHF) and 40% non-ischemic CHF (NHF). Recently, we conducted a randomized controlled trial to study three different training modalities in 60 patients with severe CHF, with a similar distribution of IHF and NHF patients. In the present post hoc analysis we compared the differences in training results between ischemic and non-ischemic patients.MethodsLeft ventricular ejection fraction (EF), end diastolic volume (EDV), end systolic volume (ESV), measured with radionuclide ventriculography (RNV) and echocardiography, NT-pro BNP, peak oxygen uptake (peak

Acculturation, immigration status and cardiovascular risk factors among Portuguese immigrants to Luxembourg: findings from ORISCAV-LUX study

V_{{{\rm O}_{2} }}