Ticagrelor is an oral platelet P2Y12 receptor antagonist which is recommended for patients suffering from myocardial infarction, both with and without persistent ST segment elevation. Morphine is the first choice drug in pain alleviation in the same clinical subset. Recently a possible negative influence of morphine on the pharmacokinetics and antiplatelet effects of P2Y12 receptor blockers has been postulated. The IMPRESSION study is a phase IV, single center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial that is designed to assess the influence of morphine on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ticagrelor in patients with myocardial infarction. The study is planned to include up to 100 patients with myocardial infarction who will be randomized into one of two arms in a 1:1 ratio. Subjects in the intervention arm prior to the loading dose of ticagrelor (180 mg) will receive morphine (5 mg) intravenously, whereas patients in the control arm will receive a placebo prior to the loading dose of ticagrelor (180 mg). The pharmacokinetics of ticagrelor and its active metabolite (AR-C124910XX) will be assessed by liquid chromatography mass spectrometry. Platelet function testing in each patient will be performed using up to four different methods (platelet vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein assay, multiple electrode aggregometry, VerifyNow, and light transmission aggregometry). This study is expected to provide essential evidence-based data on the impact of morphine on the absorption of ticagrelor in patients with myocardial infarction as well as to shed some light on the suspected connection between morphine use and antiplatelet activity of ticagrelor in the same group of patients. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02217878 (14 August 2014).

High-density lipoproteins (HDL) play an important role in the prevention of atherosclerosis. The aim of the study was to assess the relationship between serum HDL-C concentration and proinflammatory/prothrombic activation in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients. The study group included 27 acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients and 30 stable angina pectoris (SA) patients. The control group consisted of 23 people without cardiac symptoms. In the AMI and SA groups, a lower HDL-C and a higher LDL-C/HDL-C index were observed. The SA patients had lower total cholesterol, LDL-C, sE-selectin ligand, as well as higher triglycerides and CD40 concentration in comparison with both the control and AMI groups. A higher von Willebrand Factor and intercellular adhesion molecule-1 were found in both study groups. Low HDL-C concentration in the CAD patients may intensify pro-inflammatory endothelial activation and prothrombotic processes. A low concentration of HDL-C and a high value of the LDL-C/HDL-C index seem to be better indices of atherogenic processes than the LDL-C concentration alone.

Background: In an attempt to improve low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) level control in patients ineffectively treated with statins, we evaluated the effectiveness of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of 10 mg rosuvastatin and ezetimibe and its relation to the timing of drug administration. Methods: A randomized, open label, single center, crossover study involving 83 patients with coronary artery disease and hypercholesterolemia with baseline LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL. In arm I the FDC drug was administered in the morning for 6 weeks, then in the evening for the following 6 weeks and vice versa in arm II. The primary endpoint was the change in LDL-C after 6 and 12 weeks. Results: The median LDL-C concentration at baseline, after 6 and 12 weeks respectively was: 98.10 mg/dL (Q1;Q3: 85.10;116.80), 63.14 mg/dL (50.70;77.10) and 59.40 mg/dL (49.00;73.30); p < 0.001. LDL-C levels were similar regardless of the timing of drug administration (morning 62.50 mg/dL [50.70;76.00] vs. evening 59.70 mg/dL [48.20;73.80]; p = 0.259], in both time points: 6 week: 63.15 mg/dL (50.75;80.65) vs. 63.40 mg/dL (50.60;74.00), p = 0.775; and 12 week: 62.00 mg/dL (50.20;74.40) vs. 59.05 mg/dL (47.65;66.05), p = 0.362. The absolute change in LDL-C concentration for the morning vs. evening drug administration was — 6 week: –34.6 mg/dL (–56.55; –19.85) (–34.87%) vs. –31.10 mg/dL (–44.20; –16.00) (–35.87%) (p not significant); 12. week: –34.20 mg/dL (–47.8; –19.0) (–37.12%) vs. –37.20 mg/dL (–65.55; –23.85) (–40.06%) (p not significant). The therapy was safe and well tolerated. Conclusions: Fixed-dose combination of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe significantly and permanently decreases LDL-C regardless of the timing of drug administration. Background: In an attempt to improve low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) level control in patients ineffectively treated with statins, we evaluated the effectiveness of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of 10 mg rosuvastatin and ezetimibe and its relation to the timing of drug administration. Methods: A randomized, open label, single center, crossover study involving 83 patients with coronary artery disease and hypercholesterolemia with baseline LDL-C ≥ 70 mg/dL. In arm I the FDC drug was administered in the morning for 6 weeks, then in the evening for the following 6 weeks and vice versa in arm II. The primary endpoint was the change in LDL-C after 6 and 12 weeks. Results: The median LDL-C concentration at baseline, after 6 and 12 weeks respectively was: 98.10 mg/dL (Q1;Q3: 85.10;116.80), 63.14 mg/dL (50.70;77.10) and 59.40 mg/dL (49.00;73.30); p < 0.001. LDL-C levels were similar regardless of the timing of drug administration (morning 62.50 mg/dL [50.70;76.00] vs. evening 59.70 mg/dL [48.20;73.80]; p = 0.259], in both time points: 6 week: 63.15 mg/dL (50.75;80.65) vs. 63.40 mg/dL (50.60;74.00), p = 0.775; and 12 week: 62.00 mg/dL (50.20;74.40) vs. 59.05 mg/dL (47.65;66.05), p = 0.362. The absolute change in LDL-C concentration for the morning vs. evening drug administration was — 6 week: –34.6 mg/dL (–56.55; –19.85) (–34.87%) vs. –31.10 mg/dL (–44.20; –16.00) (–35.87%) (p not significant); 12. week: –34.20 mg/dL (–47.8; –19.0) (–37.12%) vs. –37.20 mg/dL (–65.55; –23.85) (–40.06%) (p not significant). The therapy was safe and well tolerated. Conclusions: Fixed-dose combination of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe significantly and permanently decreases LDL-C regardless of the timing of drug administration.

Introduction. Notwithstanding the development of modern diagnostic-therapeutic techniques, cardiovascular diseases still pose a grave health, social, and economic issue. Patients hospitalised for acute coronary syndrome should, in addition to establishing an optimal pharmacotherapy, be made aware of how to prevent this disease and recognise it using its typical symptoms and signs. Objective. The objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of educational intervention based on educational brochures in patients with myocardial infarction with regard to socio-demographic factors and baseline patients’ knowledge. Material and methods. The single-centre, prospective, observational study was conducted in a cohort of 248 patients with myocardial infarction (women n = 72, men n = 176), hospitalised between May 2015 and July 2016. Consistently with the results of univariate analysis, multivariate analysis identified age (–3.73/10 years; p < 0.0006) and the level of education (10.37; p < 0.0001) as independent factors influencing patients’ prehospital knowledge. Results. According to multivariate analysis of the level of knowledge following the educational intervention, the only factors affecting the process of learning were age (–2.04/10 years; p < 0.03) and remaining in a steady relationship (9.7; p = 0.0003). Among factors influencing the increase of knowledge, only the level of education was of statistical significance (–6.09; p < 0.02). Conclusions. The educational brochure proved to be an effective tool for therapeutic education, allowing minimisation of the disparities between the examined groups and improvement of the breadth of patients’ knowledge. Introduction. Notwithstanding the development of modern diagnostic-therapeutic techniques, cardiovascular diseases still pose a grave health, social, and economic issue. Patients hospitalised for acute coronary syndrome should, in addition to establishing an optimal pharmacotherapy, be made aware of how to prevent this disease and recognise it using its typical symptoms and signs. Objective. The objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of educational intervention based on educational brochures in patients with myocardial infarction with regard to socio-demographic factors and baseline patients’ knowledge. Material and methods. The single-centre, prospective, observational study was conducted in a cohort of 248 patients with myocardial infarction (women n = 72, men n = 176), hospitalised between May 2015 and July 2016. Consistently with the results of univariate analysis, multivariate analysis identified age (–3.73/10 years; p < 0.0006) and the level of education (10.37; p < 0.0001) as independent factors influencing patients’ prehospital knowledge. Results. According to multivariate analysis of the level of knowledge following the educational intervention, the only factors affecting the process of learning were age (–2.04/10 years; p < 0.03) and remaining in a steady relationship (9.7; p = 0.0003). Among factors influencing the increase of knowledge, only the level of education was of statistical significance (–6.09; p < 0.02). Conclusions. The educational brochure proved to be an effective tool for therapeutic education, allowing minimisation of the disparities between the examined groups and improvement of the breadth of patients’ knowledge.

Hyperlipidemia is the most prevalent cardiovascular (CV) risk factors. We aimed to analyze the distribution of lipid parameters and clinical variables associated with elevated and non-elevated selected lipid factors in a cohort of all consecutive patients whose lipid profile was assessed at a multi-specialist clinical center. This cross-sectional study analyzed electronic medical records of consecutive patients treated between March and November 2024. Lipid parameters measured included: total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TG), apolipoprotein B (apoB), and lipoprotein (a) [Lp(a)]. Non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) was calculated as TC–HDL-C. We used multivariate analysis to identify factors associated with LDL-C, TG, and Lp(a) concentrations. A total of 10,597 patients were included in the analysis. The median lipid concentrations (mg/dL) were: TC 162 (IQR 132–198), LDL-C 94 (IQR 69–129), non-HDL-C 112 (IQR 88–146), apoB 78 (IQR 63–99), and Lp(a) 11 (IQR 5–29). Elevated LDL-C > 100 mg/dL was observed in 45.7% of patients, non-HDL-C > 130 mg/dL in 35.1%, and apoB > 100 mg/dL in 23.2%. A discordance between LDL-C and apoB concentrations was present in 23.7% of patients (p < 0.001), while LDL-C/non-HDL-C and apoB/non-HDL-C discordance rates were 13% and 12.6%, respectively (p < 0.001). Patients at very high CV risk had lower TC, LDL-C, non-HDL-C, and apoB concentrations compared to those with low-to-moderate and high CV risk (p < 0.001) and showed the highest median Lp(a) concentration of 13 mg/dL (IQR 5–31; p = 0.01). Goal achievements of LDL-C < 100 mg/dL, TG < 150 mg/dL, and Lp(a) < 30 mg/dL were associated with lipid-lowering treatment [OR 1.32 (95% CI 1.12–1.52)], atrial fibrillation [OR 1.31 (95% CI 1.11–1.54)], chronic coronary syndromes [OR 1.27 (95% CI 1.05–1.52)], smoking [OR 0.78 (95% CI 0.65–0.95)], BMI [OR 0.98 (95% CI 0.96–0.99)], and age [OR 1.006 (95% CI 1.002–1.009)]. The highest proportion of patients with results within the normal range was observed for apoB and the lowest for LDL-C. The highest discordance was observed between apoB/LDL-C, with similar discordance rates between LDL-C/non-HDL-C and apoB/non-HDL-C. Lipid profile control was associated with BMI, atrial fibrillation, age, chronic coronary syndrome, aortic stenosis, diabetes, male gender, lipid-lowering therapy, and smoking. These findings highlight the complexity of lipid management.