Greece was recently reclassified from low- to medium-risk country in terms of cardiovascular disease, with 27% of cardiovascular deaths attributed to hypercholesterolemia. EMENO nationwide survey (2013-2016) assessed the epidemiology of dyslipidemia in the general population in Greece. A random sample of adults was drawn by multistage stratified random sampling based on 2011 census. Standardized questionnaires and blood tests for total cholesterol (TC), low-density (LDL-C), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), and triglycerides were used. Hypercholesterolemia was defined as TC ≥ 240/200 mg/dL and/or the use of lipid-lowering drugs, hyper-LDL-cholesterolemia as LDL-C ≥160/130/100 mg/dL and/or the use of drugs, hypo-HDL-cholesterolemia as HDL-C <40 mg/dL, and hypertriglyceridemia as triglycerides ≥150 mg/dL. Weighted analysis was applied to adjust for study design, age/sex distribution discrepancies between sample and population and nonresponse. Of 6,006 individuals recruited, 4,298 were analyzed (mean [SD] age 49.2 [18.5] years, men 48.5%, BMI 28.2 [5.7] kg/m²). Mean TC, LDL-C, HDL-C, and TG were 193.9 [44.4], 118.5 [37.6], 49.1 [14.9], and 130.8 [94.4] mg/dL, respectively. The prevalence of hypercholesterolemia was 27.6/52.4% for thresholds ≥240/200 mg/dL, and of hyper-LDL-cholesterolemia was 26.3/46.7/74% for thresholds ≥160/130/100 mg/dL, with no differences between sexes. The prevalence of hypo-HDL-cholesterolemia was 27.5% (men/women 38.1/17.5%, p < 0.001) and of hypertriglyceridemia was 27.8% (men/women 32.6/23.4%, p < 0.001). Lipid-lowering drugs were used by 14.1% of the participants (men/women 12.6/15.6%, p < 0.001). More than 50% of adults in Greece have some type of dyslipidemia (mainly TC ≥ 200 mg/dL) and 14% are treated. Nationwide programmes are needed to manage dyslipidemia and halt the increasing rate of cardiovascular disease in Greece.

Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, underscoring the importance of effective primary prevention strategies. Current total cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk assessment tools, such as the Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2) in Europe and the Pooled cohort equations (PCEs) and Predicting Risk of CVD EVENTs (PREVENT) in the USA, aim to identify individuals at high CVD risk and guide clinical decision-making in the primary prevention setting. Statin therapy reduces cardiovascular events and is recommended as the first step for individuals with estimated CVD risk above specific thresholds. Moreover, the presence of risk modifiers, as well as the detection of asymptomatic atherosclerosis, reclassifies low-moderate CVD risk individuals into higher risk categories, contributing to tailored therapeutic decisions in primary prevention. However, differences in the performance of the available CVD risk assessment tools, the recommended thresholds for intervention, and the treatment targets by scientific societies introduce considerable inconsistency to the statin therapy practices. In addition, physicians’ inertia and poor patients’ adherence contribute to inadequate dyslipidemia control rates. This narrative review examines the available evidence on the current most used CVD risk assessment tools and the respective lipid-lowering recommendations, and highlights the role of targeted screening for asymptomatic atherosclerosis in terms of individualized therapy for primary prevention.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is often asymptomatic and undiagnosed. As AF and hypertension often coexist, opportunistic AF detection during routine automated blood pressure (BP) measurement appears to be an attractive screening method. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies assessing the diagnostic test accuracy of office, home, or 24-hour ambulatory BP measuring devices with AF detection algorithms versus reference electrocardiography. Analyses were performed per participant (AF status based on several BP readings; most office/home devices) or per reading (AF status based on individual readings; all ambulatory devices). A meta-analysis stratified by device type (office/home/ambulatory) was conducted to calculate pooled measures of diagnostic accuracy. Sensitivity/meta-regression analyses were also performed. RESULTS: Among 3096 records initially retrieved, 23 diagnostic test accuracy studies were included. Data derived from 11 093 individuals (weighted age 69 years, males 56%, hypertensives 79%, diabetics 24%, and AF prevalence 17%) indicated a pooled sensitivity 0.97 (95% CI, 0.92–0.99), specificity 0.93 (95% CI, 0.90–0.95), and accuracy 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89–0.95), with generally consistent results using office, home, or ambulatory BP devices (slightly lower specificity with the latter). The positive and negative predictive values were 0.70 (95% CI, 0.60–0.80) and 0.99 (95% CI, 0.98–1.00), respectively. Sensitivity analyses indicated lower specificity in studies implementing reading versus participant analyses. Most studies presented a low risk of bias and minor applicability concerns. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable and consistent evidence suggesting high diagnostic accuracy of AF detection algorithms implemented in automated BP monitors during routine BP measurements in and out of the office. AF diagnosis requires verification (electrocardiography) before treatment is administered.

The COVID-19 pandemic had an adverse impact on several cardiovascular risk factors. This study investigated the prevalence, awareness and treatment of hypertension in Greece before and after the pandemic. Data were collected in the context of the May Measurement Month (MMM) global survey initiated by the International Society of Hypertension. Adult volunteers (age ≥18 years) were recruited through opportunistic screening in public areas across cities in Greece in 2019 and 2022. Medical history and triplicate sitting blood pressure (BP) measurements were taken using validated automated upper-arm cuff devices. The data were uploaded to the international MMM cloud platform. Hypertension was defined as systolic BP ≥140 mmHg and/or diastolic ≥90 mmHg, and/or self-reported use of drugs for hypertension. The same threshold was used to define uncontrolled BP in treated individuals. Data from 12,080 adults were collected (5,727/6,353 in MMM 2019/2022; men 46/49%, p<0.01; mean age 52.7±16.6/54.8±16.2, p<0.001; smokers, 24.7/30.5, p<0.001; diabetics 12/11.5%, p=NS; cardiovascular disease 5/5.8%, p=NS). The prevalence of hypertension was 41.6/42.6% (MMM 2019/2022, p=NS), with 21.3/27.5% of hypertensives being unaware of their condition (p<0.001), 5.6/2.4% aware untreated (p<0.001), 24.8/22.1% treated uncontrolled (p<0.05), and 48.3/47.8% treated controlled (p=NS). In Greece, the COVID-19 pandemic did not appear to affect the prevalence and control of hypertension, However, the rate of undiagnosed hypertension was higher after the pandemic. National strategies need to be implemented for the early detection and optimal management of hypertension in the general population in Greece.

The European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) have recently released separate guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension, published less than 12 months apart. Many practicing physicians, especially in the primary care setting, might find it challenging to thoroughly read the two lengthy documents and, most importantly, might get confused in areas of discrepancies. This review compares the two sets of recommendations using the BEST framework, which focuses on Blood pressure (BP) measurement and monitoring, Establishing the diagnosis and classifying hypertension, Stratified patient assessment, and Therapeutic decisions, providing a structured overview of their areas of agreement and divergence and aiming at highlighting what the practicing physician should keep in mind. In general, the main recommendations made by the 2023 ESH and 2024 ESC guidelines regarding hypertension diagnosis and management present many similarities: office diagnostic threshold at 140/90 mmHg (multiple measurements and visits), primary role of out-of-office BP monitoring in confirming hypertension diagnosis and in follow-up of treated patients, cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment based on risk calculators and risk modifiers, initiation of drug treatment based on BP level and CV risk, treatment strategy based on steps and combination therapy, and treatment target for most patients of <130/80 mmHg.