Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction Frame Count (TFC) is an index that provides a quantitative evaluation of coronary microvascular dysfunction. In this study, we aimed to examine the effect of C...

Background: The Index of Cardiac Electrophysiological Balance (ICEB) has emerged as a electrocardiographic marker reflecting the equilibrium between ventricular depolarization and repolarization. Although obesity is known to alter cardiac electrophysiology, the combined influence of body mass index (BMI) and objective nutritional status on ICEB and its heart rate-corrected form (ICEBc) remains insufficiently defined. This study aimed to investigate the associations between BMI categories, nutritional status, and cardiac electrophysiological balance. Methods: This cross-sectional study included 591 adult patients classified as normal-weight, overweight, or obese according to BMI. Electrophysiological assessment of ICEB (QT/QRS) and ICEBc (QTc/QRS) values was calculated from standard 12-lead electrocardiogram recordings. Participants’ nutritional status was analyzed using validated clinical indices such as the Prognostic Nutritional Index (PNI), Controlling Nutritional Status (CONUT), Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) and Hemoglobin–Albumin–Lymphocyte–Platelet (HALP) score. Results: According to the results, both ICEB and ICEBc showed significant differences among BMI categories (p < 0.001). ICEB/ICEBc exhibited a non-linear distribution. The ICEB/ICEBc values were found to be minimum in the normal weight group at 4.22 ± 0.54/4.87 ± 0.66 and maximum in the obese group at 4.27 ± 0.51/4.99 ± 0.59. The ICEB/ICEBc value closest to the optimal physiological limits was found in the overweight group at 4.04 ± 0.53/4.59 ± 0.58. Higher ICEBc quartiles were accompanied by increased GNRI (120.9 ± 13.7, 129 ± 15.1, 130.5 ± 16.3, 131.8 ± 17.6, p < 0.001)and decreased HALP scores (59.7 ± 24.4, 56.1 ± 25.3, 55.2 ± 25.9, 51.1 ± 19.4, p: 0.025). Conclusion: The association between BMI and cardiac electrophysiological balance is non-linear and appears to be modulated by nutritional and inflammatory status. ICEBc may represent a more sensitive marker than ICEB for detecting subtle electrophysiological alterations related to obesity.

Background: Achieving target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) frequently requires combination lipid-lowering therapy. Single-pill combination (SPC) regimens may improve adherence compared with free-dose combinations (FDC) in real-world clinical practice. Methods: This retrospective observational study included 450 ASCVD patients with baseline LDL-C levels of 70–189 mg/dL who were followed in cardiology outpatient clinics between January 2023 and December 2024. Patients received atorvastatin–ezetimibe either as a single-pill combination (SPC, n = 392) or as a free-dose combination (FDC, n = 58). Primary endpoints were LDL-C reduction and treatment adherence (≥ 80% of prescribed doses). Secondary endpoints included LDL-C target attainment and adverse events. Non-parametric tests and chi-square/Fisher’s exact tests were used for statistical analysis. Results: At 1 month, LDL-C levels were significantly lower in the SPC group compared with the FDC group (90.6 vs. 119 mg/dL; p = 0.005), and adherence was higher (89.8% vs. 70.7%; p < 0.001). At 4 months, LDL-C levels were comparable between groups, while continuous adherence remained significantly higher in the SPC group (86% vs. 69%; p = 0.001). A higher proportion of SPC-treated patients achieved LDL-C < 100 mg/dL at 1 month (81.9% vs. 67.2%; p = 0.009). Conclusions: In this real-world ASCVD cohort, SPC therapy with atorvastatin and ezetimibe was associated with superior adherence and comparable lipid-lowering efficacy despite lower statin doses. Fixed-dose combination strategies may represent an effective approach to optimize adherence and cardiovascular risk management.

Background: Chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and real-world data on outpatient management are limited. Methods: In total, 697 patients with previously diagnosed CCS who visited outpatient cardiology clinics at 25 centers in Turkey between June 2023 and December 2023 were prospectively enrolled and followed up for 12 weeks. Demographic and clinical characteristics, diagnostic and therapeutic strategies, a modified questionnaire derived from the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (modified SAQ-based questionnaire), and clinical outcomes were recorded. Results: The most common diagnostic modalities were exercise stress testing (31.6%) and coronary angiography (38.2%). Medical therapy (58.5%) was preferred over interventional treatment (41.5%). Among patients who were not receiving the respective medication at baseline, beta-blockers (61.8%), statins (46.5%), and ranolazine (40.4%) were the most commonly newly initiated medications. Patients in the intervention group were younger, were more frequently current smokers, had greater nitrate use, and had lower ejection fraction than those in the medical treatment group. Patient-reported responses to the modified SAQ-based questionnaire shifted toward less functional limitation, lower angina burden, and better perceived quality of life over the 12-week follow-up. Conclusions: Medical therapy was the predominant management strategy for CCS in Turkey. The observed diagnostic and therapeutic patterns reflect real-world management of patients with established CCS, with substantial use of invasive coronary angiography and high baseline utilization of guideline-directed medical therapies.