Background— Mortality resulting from coronary heart disease (CHD), cardiovascular disease (CVD), and all causes in persons with diabetes and pre-existing CVD is high; however, these risks compared with those with metabolic syndrome (MetS) are unclear. We examined the impact of MetS on CHD, CVD, and overall mortality among US adults. Methods and Results— In a prospective cohort study, 6255 subjects 30 to 75 years of age (54% female) (representative of 64 million adults in the United States) from the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were followed for a mean±SD of 13.3±3.8 years. MetS was defined by modified National Cholesterol Education Program criteria. From sample-weighted multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression, compared with those with neither MetS nor prior CVD, age-, gender-, and risk factor–adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for CHD mortality were 2.02 (95% CI, 1.42 to 2.89) for those with MetS and 4.19 (95% CI, 3.04 to 5.79) for those with pre-existing CVD. For CVD mortality, HRs were 1.82 (95% CI, 1.40 to 2.37) and 3.14 (95% CI, 2.49 to 3.96), respectively; for overall mortality, HRs were 1.40 (95% CI, 1.19 to 1.66) and 1.87 (95% CI, 1.60 to 2.17), respectively. In persons with MetS but without diabetes, risks of CHD and CVD mortality remained elevated. Diabetes predicted all mortality end points. Those with even 1 to 2 MetS risk factors were at increased risk for mortality from CHD and CVD. Moreover, MetS more strongly predicts CHD, CVD, and total mortality than its individual components. Conclusions— CHD, CVD, and total mortality are significantly higher in US adults with than in those without MetS.

Risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) shows considerable heterogeneity both in generally healthy persons and in those with known ASCVD. The foundation of preventive cardiology begins with assessing baseline ASCVD risk using global risk scores based on standard office-based measures. Persons at low risk are generally recommended for lifestyle management only and those at highest risk are recommended for both lifestyle and pharmacologic therapy. Additional “risk enhancing” factors, including both traditional risk factors and novel biomarkers and inflammatory factors can be used to further assess ASCVD risk, especially in those at borderline or intermediate risk. There are also female-specific risk enhancers, social determinants of health, and considerations for high-risk ethnic groups. Screening for subclinical atherosclerosis, especially with the use of coronary calcium screening, can further inform the treatment decision if uncertain based on the above strategies. Persons with pre-existing ASCVD also have variable risk, affected by the number of major ASCVD events, whether recurrent events have occurred recently, and the presence of other major risk factors or high-risk conditions. Current guidelines define high to very high risk ASCVD accordingly. Accurate ASCVD risk assessment is crucial for the appropriate targeting of preventive therapies to reduce ASCVD risk. Finally, the clinician-patient risk discussion focusing on lifestyle management and the risks and benefits of evidence-based pharmacologic therapies to best lower ASCVD risk is central to this process. This clinical practice statement provides the preventive cardiology specialist with guidance and tools for assessment of ASCVD risk with the goal of appropriately targeting treatment approaches for prevention of ASCVD events.