Menopausal hormone therapy (HT) was widely used in the past, but with the publication of seminal primary and secondary prevention trials that reported an excess cardiovascular risk with combined estrogen-progestin, HT use declined significantly. However, over the past 20 years, much has been learned about the relationship between the timing of HT use with respect to age and time since menopause, HT route of administration, and cardiovascular disease risk. Four leading medical societies recommend HT for the treatment of menopausal women with bothersome menopausal symptoms. In this context, this review, led by the American College of Cardiology Cardiolovascular Disease in Women Committee, along with leading gynecologists, women’s health internists, and endocrinologists, aims to provide guidance on HT use, including the selection of patients and HT formulation with a focus on caring for symptomatic women with cardiovascular disease risk.

Background Compared with White Americans, Black Americans have a greater prevalence of cardiac events following percutaneous coronary intervention. We evaluated the association between race and neighborhood income on post–percutaneous coronary intervention cardiac events and assessed whether income modifies the effect of race on this relationship. Methods and Results Consecutive patients (n=23 822) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2016, were included. All‐cause mortality and major adverse cardiac event were assessed at 3 years. Extended 10‐year follow‐up was performed for those residing locally (n=1285). Neighborhood income was derived using median adjusted annual gross household income reported within the patient's zip code. We compared differences in treatment and outcomes, adjusting for race, income, and their interaction. In total, 3173 (13.3%) patients self‐identified as Black Americans, and 20 649 (86.7%) self‐identified as White Americans. Black Americans had a worse baseline cardiac risk profile and lower neighborhood income compared with White Americans. Although risk profile improved with increasing income in White Americans, no difference was observed across incomes among Black Americans. Despite similar long‐term outpatient cardiology follow‐up and medication prescription, risk profiles among Black Americans remained worse. At 3 years, unadjusted all‐cause mortality (18.0% versus 15.2%; P <0.001) and major adverse cardiac event (37.3% versus 34.6%; P <0.001) were greater among Black Americans and with lower income (both P <0.001); race, income, and their interaction were not significant predictors in multivariable models. At 10‐year follow‐up, increasing income was associated with improved outcomes only in White Americans but not Black Americans. In multivariable models for major adverse cardiac event, income (hazard ratio [HR], 0.97 [95% CI, 0.96–0.98]; P =0.005), Black race (HR, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.58–1.96]; P =0.006), and their interaction (HR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.97–0.99]; P =0.003) were significant predictors. Similar findings were observed for cardiac death. Conclusions Early 3‐year post–percutaneous coronary intervention outcomes were driven by worse risk factor profiles in both Black Americans and those with lower neighborhood income. However, late 10‐year outcomes showed an independent effect of race and income, with improving outcomes with greater income limited to White Americans. These findings illustrate the importance of developing novel care strategies that address both risk factor modification and social determinants of health to mitigate disparities in cardiac outcomes.

No abstract

Importance Prescribed aerobic-based exercise training is a low risk fundamental component of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Secondary prevention therapeutic strategies following a spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) or aortic dissection (AD) should include CR. Current exercise guidance for post-dissection patients recommends fundamental training components including target heart rate zones are not warranted. Omitting fundamental elements from exercise prescriptions risks safety and makes it challenging for both clinicians and patients to understand and implement recommendations in real-world practice. We review the principles of exercise prescription for CR, focusing on translating guidelines and evidence from well-studied high-risk CR populations to support the recommendation that exercise testing and individualized exercise prescription are important for patients following a dissection. Discussion When patients self-perceive exercise intensity there is a tendency to underestimate intensities within metabolic domains that should be strictly avoided during routine exercise training following a dissection. However, exercise testing associated with CR enrollment has gained support and not been linked to adverse events in optimally medicated post-dissection patients. Graded heart rate and blood pressure responses recorded throughout exercise testing provide key information for developing an exercise prescription. An exercise prescription that is reflective of medical history, medications, and cardiorespiratory fitness optimizes patient safety and yields improvements in blood pressure control and cardiorespiratory fitness, among other benefits. Conclusion This clinical practice and education article demonstrates how to develop and manage a CR exercise prescription for post-acute dissection patients that can be safe and effective for maintaining blood pressure control and improving cardiorespiratory fitness pre-post CR.

No abstract