Katharina Schütt

Guidelines evaluate and summarize available evidence, with the aim of assisting health professionals in proposing the best diagnostic or therapeutic approach for an individual patient with a given condition. Guidelines are intended for use by health professionals and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) makes its Guidelines freely available. ESC Guidelines do not override the individual responsibility of health professionals to make appropriate and accurate decisions in consideration of each patient’s health condition and in consultation with that patient or the patient’s caregiver where appropriate and/or necessary. It is also the health professional’s responsibility to verify the rules and regulations applicable in each country to drugs and devices at the time of prescription, and, where appropriate, to respect the ethical rules of their profession. ESC Guidelines represent the official position of the ESC on a given topic and are regularly updated. ESC Policies and Procedures for formulating and issuing ESC Guidelines can be found on the ESC website (https://www.escardio.org/Guidelines). The Members of this Task Force were selected by the ESC to represent professionals involved with the medical care of patients with this pathology. The selection procedure aimed to include members from across the whole of the ESC region and from relevant ESC Subspecialty Communities. Consideration was given to diversity and inclusion, notably with respect to gender and country of origin. The Task Force performed a critical evaluation of diagnostic and therapeutic approaches, including assessment of the risk-benefit ratio. The strength of every recommendation and the level of evidence supporting them were weighed and scored according to pre-defined scales as outlined below. The Task Force followed ESC voting procedures, and all approved recommendations were subject to a vote and achieved at least 75% agreement among voting members. The experts of the writing and reviewing panels provided declaration of interest forms for all relationships that might be perceived as real or potential sources of conflicts of interest. Their declarations of interest were reviewed according to the ESC declaration of interest rules and can be found on the ESC website (http://www.escardio.org/Guidelines), and have been compiled in a report published in a supplementary document with the guidelines. The Task Force received its entire financial support from the ESC without any involvement from the healthcare industry. The ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) Committee supervises and co-ordinates the preparation of new guidelines and is responsible for the approval process. ESC Guidelines undergo extensive review by the CPG Committee and external experts, including members from across the whole of the ESC region and from relevant ESC Subspecialty Communities and National Cardiac Societies. After appropriate revisions, the guidelines are signed off by all the experts involved in the Task Force. The finalized document is signed off by the CPG Committee for publication in the European Heart Journal. The guidelines were developed after careful consideration of the scientific and medical knowledge and the evidence available at the time of their writing. Tables of evidence summarizing the findings of studies informing development of the guidelines are included. The ESC warns readers that the technical language may be misinterpreted and declines any responsibility in this respect. Off-label use of medication may be presented in the current Guidelines if a sufficient level of evidence shows that it can be considered medically appropriate for a given condition. However, the final decisions concerning an individual patient must be made by the responsible health professional giving special consideration to: The specific situation of the patient. Unless otherwise provided for by national regulations, off-label use of medication should be limited to situations where it is in the patient’s interest with regard to the quality, safety, and efficacy of care, and only after the patient has been informed and has provided consent. Country-specific health regulations, indications by governmental drug regulatory agencies, and the ethical rules to which health professionals are subject, where applicable.

the new 2023 ESC guidelines for the management of cardiovascular disease in patients with diabetes1 mainly focuses on two aspects (Figure 1). • screening and cardiovascular risk assessment • evidence-based, person-centred treatment strategies in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease

BACKGROUND: The TIM-HF2 study demonstrated that remote patient management (RPM) in a well-defined heart failure (HF) population reduced the percentage of days lost due to unplanned cardiovascular hospital admissions or all-cause death during 1-year follow-up (hazard ratio 0.80) and all-cause mortality alone (HR 0.70). Higher rates of hospital admissions and mortality have been reported in HF patients with diabetes compared with HF patients without diabetes. Therefore, in a post-hoc analysis of the TIM-HF2 study, we investigated the efficacy of RPM in HF patients with diabetes. METHODS: TIM-HF2 study was a randomized, controlled, unmasked (concealed randomization), multicentre trial, performed in Germany between August 2013 and May 2018. HF-Patients in NYHA class II/III who had a HF-related hospital admission within the previous 12 months, irrespective of left ventricular ejection fraction, and were randomized to usual care with or without added RPM and followed for 1 year. The primary endpoint was days lost due to unplanned cardiovascular hospitalization or due to death of any cause. This post-hoc analysis included 707 HF patients with diabetes. RESULTS: In HF patients with diabetes, RPM reduced the percentage of days lost due to cardiovascular hospitalization or death compared with usual care (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.48-0.90), and the rate of all-cause mortality alone (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.32-0.85). RPM was also associated with an improvement in quality of life (mean difference in change in global score of Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire score (MLHFQ): - 3.4, 95% CI - 6.2 to - 0.6). CONCLUSION: These results support the use of RPM in HF patients with diabetes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01878630.

Background: Chronic inflammation is a cardiovascular risk factor, and interleukin-1β (IL-1β) is central to the inflammatory host response. Platelets contain the NLRP3 inflammasome and are able to translate IL-1β messenger RNA (mRNA) and secrete mature IL-1β upon activation. However, the role of a chronic inflammatory environment in platelet IL-1β mRNA and protein content remains unclear. Objectives: The aim of the current study was to investigate intracellular platelet IL-1β and IL-1β mRNA in a chronic inflammatory state. Methods: Sixty-five patients with stable inflammation (ie, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein within predefined margins in 2 separate measurements) were stratified according to high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels in low (0.0-0.9 mg/L), medium (1.0-2.9 mg/L), and high (3.0-9.9 mg/L) risk groups. Platelet reactivity as well as platelet IL-1β protein synthesis were studied. Results: The highest risk group was characterized by a distinct cardiovascular risk profile and approximately 20% higher platelet counts. While platelet reactivity was not different, a reduction in intracellular platelet IL-1β mRNA and IL-1β protein levels was observed in the highest risk group and was linked to decreased platelet size and granularity. This signature suggests a phenotype of chronic IL-1β secretion and could be experimentally phenocopied by stimulation of platelets from healthy volunteers with either TRAP-6 or collagen related peptide (CRP-XL). Conclusion: Our data suggest a phenotype of chronic IL-1β secretion by platelets in patients with chronic sterile inflammation.

Guida ESC nel loro esercizio del giudizio clinico