TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of American and European Guidelines for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease
T2 - JACC Guideline Comparison
AU - Fegers-Wustrow, Isabel
AU - Gianos, Eugenia
AU - Halle, Martin
AU - Yang, Eugene
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation
PY - 2022/4/5
Y1 - 2022/4/5
N2 - This review compares the primary prevention recommendations of the recent 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and 2019 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines on cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. Although the 2019 ACC/AHA guideline represents its inaugural version, the ESC guideline is an update to its 2016 statement. Both guidelines address prevention using a holistic approach and agree on the importance of lifestyle optimization and intensified risk factor management. Cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment tools differ, reflecting the unique populations being screened as well as philosophical differences to their approach. Conventional risk factors are used to estimate CV risk, but each guideline acknowledges the role of risk modifiers to refine risk calculation. The ESC guideline recognizes the importance of nonclassical risk factors, including environmental issues, that impact CV health at the population level and calls for legislative action at the local, regional, and national levels.
AB - This review compares the primary prevention recommendations of the recent 2021 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and 2019 American College of Cardiology (ACC)/American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines on cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention. Although the 2019 ACC/AHA guideline represents its inaugural version, the ESC guideline is an update to its 2016 statement. Both guidelines address prevention using a holistic approach and agree on the importance of lifestyle optimization and intensified risk factor management. Cardiovascular (CV) risk assessment tools differ, reflecting the unique populations being screened as well as philosophical differences to their approach. Conventional risk factors are used to estimate CV risk, but each guideline acknowledges the role of risk modifiers to refine risk calculation. The ESC guideline recognizes the importance of nonclassical risk factors, including environmental issues, that impact CV health at the population level and calls for legislative action at the local, regional, and national levels.
KW - guidelines
KW - primary prevention
KW - recommendations
KW - secondary prevention
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85126725687&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jacc.2022.02.001
DO - 10.1016/j.jacc.2022.02.001
M3 - Review article
C2 - 35361353
AN - SCOPUS:85126725687
SN - 0735-1097
VL - 79
SP - 1304
EP - 1313
JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology
IS - 13
ER -