Some studies have suggested that high levels of total white blood cell (WBC) count and C-reactive protein (CRP) may be considered as independent prognostic factors in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and/or after cardiac revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Evidence on the role of neutrophils in cardiovascular disease is less compelling. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review of the literature with the aim of identifying all the available evidence to clarify the role of neutrophils (absolute or relative count, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio) as a prognostic risk factor in patients with ACS and/or cardiac revascularisation. All published studies evaluating the role of neutrophils as a risk factor for clinical outcomes were assessed using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Study selection, data extraction and validity assessment was performed independently by two reviewers. Twenty-one studies (17 of which had positive results) for a total of more than 34,000 patients were included. Ten of 13 studies in ACS patients found that neutrophils measured on-admission are related to mortality rate and/or to major adverse clinical events. A predictive value of neutrophils after cardiac revascularisation procedures was reported in seven out of eight studies. Most of the studies showed that neutrophils were independent predictors of cardiovascular outcomes when analysed concomitantly with other markers of inflammation (WBC, CRP). The findings of our systematic review highlight the potential application of this inexpensive and readily available inflammatory marker for risk stratification in patients with ACS and/or cardiac revascularisation.

No abstract

Background and aims. Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is an inherited disorder characterized by high levels of blood cholesterol from birth and premature coronary heart disease. Thus, the identification of FH patients is crucial to prevent or delay the onset of cardiovascular events, and the availability of a tool helping with the diagnosis in the setting of general medicine is essential to improve FH patient identification. Methods. This study evaluated the performance of the Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) score in FH patients enrolled in the LIPIGEN study, an Italian integrated network aimed at improving the identification of patients with genetic dyslipidaemias, including FH. Results. The DLCN score was applied on a sample of 1377 adults (mean age 42.9±14.2 years) with genetic diagnosis of FH, resulting in 28.5% of the sample classified as probable FH and 37.9% as classified definite FH. Among these subjects, 43.4% had at least one missing data out of 8, and about 10.0% had 4 missing data or more. When analyzed based on the type of missing data, a higher percentage of subjects with at least 1 missing data in the clinical history or physical examination was classified as possible FH (DLCN score 3-5). We also found that using real or estimated pre-treatment LDL-C levels may significantly modify the DLCN score. Conclusions. Although the DLCN score is a useful tool for physicians in the diagnosis of FH, it may be limited by the complexity to retrieve all the essential information, suggesting a crucial role of the clinical judgement in the identification of FH subjects.

No abstract

Background A significant proportion of individuals clinically diagnosed with familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), but without any disease‐causing mutation, are likely to have polygenic hypercholesterolemia. We evaluated the distribution of a polygenic risk score, consisting of 12 low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C)‐raising variants (polygenic LDL‐C risk score), in subjects with a clinical diagnosis of FH. Methods and Results Within the Lipid Transport Disorders Italian Genetic Network (LIPIGEN) study, 875 patients who were FH‐mutation positive (women, 54.75%; mean age, 42.47±15.00 years) and 644 patients who were FH‐mutation negative (women, 54.21%; mean age, 49.73±13.54 years) were evaluated. Patients who were FH‐mutation negative had lower mean levels of pretreatment LDL‐C than patients who were FH‐mutation positive (217.14±55.49 versus 270.52±68.59 mg/dL, P <0.0001). The mean value (±SD) of the polygenic LDL‐C risk score was 1.00 (±0.18) in patients who were FH‐mutation negative and 0.94 (±0.20) in patients who were FH‐mutation positive ( P <0.0001). In the receiver operating characteristic analysis, the area under the curve for recognizing subjects characterized by polygenic hypercholesterolemia was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.56–0.62), with sensitivity and specificity being 78% and 36%, respectively, at 0.905 as a cutoff value. Higher mean polygenic LDL‐C risk score levels were observed among patients who were FH‐mutation negative having pretreatment LDL‐C levels in the range of 150 to 350 mg/dL (150–249 mg/dL: 1.01 versus 0.91, P <0.0001; 250–349 mg/dL: 1.02 versus 0.95, P =0.0001). A positive correlation between polygenic LDL‐C risk score and pretreatment LDL‐C levels was observed among patients with FH independently of the presence of causative mutations. Conclusions This analysis confirms the role of polymorphisms in modulating LDL‐C levels, even in patients with genetically confirmed FH. More data are needed to support the use of the polygenic score in routine clinical practice.