In our study, we aimed to find simple, useful biomarkers in patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction to predict coronary artery severity.

Systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI), is associated with prognosis in coronary artery disease (CAD), heart failure (HF), and acute myocardial infarction. This study investigated the relationship between SIRI and non-dipper hypertension. The study retrospectively included a total of 254 naive, newly diagnosed hypertensive individuals based on ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), containing 166 dippers (DHT) and 88 non-dippers (NDHT). The SIRI value of all patients was calculated based on neutrophil, monocyte, and lymphocyte counts. The average age of study population was 50.7 ± 9.4 years old, and the male ratio was 68.5%. Compared with DHT, patients in the NDHT group had higher SIRI, monocyte to HDL-C ratio (MHR), neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), C-reactive protein (CRP), and neutrophil count, while high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and lymphocyte count were lower (p < 0.05). The left ventricular mass index (LVMI) was higher in the NDHT group (p < 0.05). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that SIRI, LVMI, and HDL-C were independent predictor factors for NDHT. ROC curve analysis determined the optimal SIRI cut-off value for predicting NDHT diagnosis to be 2.41 (sensitivity 69.3%, specificity 64.5%, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.743; p < 0.001). The AUC values obtained for SIRI, MHR, NLR, PLR, HDL-C, and LVMI parameters in the ROC curve analysis were compared pairwise. The results demonstrated that SIRI’s discriminative capacity in predicting NDHT was superior to all other indices. SIRI is an independent and significant predictor factor for NDHT and is superior in predicting NDHT diagnosis compared with HDL-C, MHR, LVMI, NLR, and PLR. Graphical Abstract Relationship between SIRI and non-dipper hypertension. Can inflammation-based hematological parameters serve as an alternative to ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in the diagnosis of non-dipper hypertension? LAd Left Atrium Diameter; HDL-C High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol; LDL-C Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol; NLR Neutrophil/Lymphocyte Ratio; PLR Platelet/Lymphocyte Ratio; SIRI Systemic İnflammatory Response İndex; LVMI Left Ventricular Mass İndex; MHR Monocyte To Hdl-C Ratio

Objectives: In patients with acute coronary syndrome, age, ejection fraction, diabetes, hypertension, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are regarded as independent risk factors for the development of acute kidney disease (ACD). This research evaluated the glomerular filtration rates (GFR) of acute coronary syndrome patient groups who were hypertensive and those who were not. Methods: This retrospective analysis comprised 764 patients with acute coronary syndrome who had applied to our institution before coronary angiography. There were two groups created from these patients. In the first group, there were 383 hypertensive patients; in the second group, there were 381 non-hypertensive patients. To assess how well these patients' kidneys were functioning, GFR was determined and compared. Results: The mean age of the two groups did not significantly differ from one another (p = 0.053). The standard lipid measures of total cholesterol, triglyceride, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, and high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol levels did not differ substantially between the two groups. The two groups had no discernible difference regarding high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, N-terminal fragment brain natriuretic peptides, creatinine, and thrombocyte levels. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure, as well as diabetes mellitus, were all considerably higher in the hypertensive patients’ group (p < 0.001). The GFR in hypertensive patients was substantially lower (64.83 ± 19.76 vs. 70.71 ± 19.19, p < 0.001) Conclusions: Our research revealed a strong link between hypertension and diminished renal function. This leads us to believe that hypertension may be a separate risk factor for the decline in renal function in acute coronary syndrome patients.

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.

Objectives: SMYRNA-HF study is a prospective multicenter registry study to determine the profiles of patients with heart failure (HF) in Turkey. This study aimed to present the baseline characteristics of preliminary cohort by comparing them according to different HF phenotypes. Methods: The first SMYRNA-HF cohort included outpatients with HF from 9 centers. Patients were classified into three HF phenotypes as HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), mildly reduced EF (HFmrEF), and preserved EF (HFpEF) as recommended by guidelines. Results: Overall, 298 patients were included in this preliminary analysis that 57% of the patients were classified as having HFrEF, 33.3% as having HFpEF, and 9.7% as having HFmrEF. Female gender was more common in HFpEF (p = 0.003). Age, frequency of diabetes mellitus, use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blocker, use of beta-blocker, use of daily loop diuretic, heart rate, blood urea nitrogen levels, lipid profiles, hemoglobin, white blood cell, platelet levels were similar among three HF phenotypes. Body mass index (BMI) (p < 0.001), frequency of hypertension (HT) (p < 0.001), and atrial fibrillation (AF) (p = 0.015) were higher in HFpEF. Ischemic etiology (p < 0.001) was less frequent in HFpEF. Use of mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist was higher in HFrEF (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Our study presented the baseline characteristics of outpatients with HF in Turkey. There were significant differences among HF phenotypes in terms of gender, BMI, frequency of HT, AF, and ischemic etiology. Treatment implementations seem to follow the guidelines. Although the rates are low, new treatment approaches recommended in the most recent guidelines seem to enter clinical practice.