Aims To validate the reported increased atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk associated with very high lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and to investigate the impact of routine Lp(a) assessment on risk reclassification. Methods and results We performed a cross-sectional case-control study in the Amsterdam UMC, a tertiary hospital in The Netherlands. All patients in whom a lipid blood test was ordered between October 2018 and October 2019 were included. Individuals with Lp(a) >99th percentile were age and sex matched to individuals with Lp(a) ≤20th percentile. We computed odds ratios (ORs) for myocardial infarction (MI) and ASCVD using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, and systolic blood pressure. Furthermore, we assessed the additive value of Lp(a) to established ASCVD risk algorithms. Lipoprotein(a) levels were determined in 12 437 individuals, out of whom 119 cases [Lp(a) >99th percentile; >387.8 nmol/L] and 119 matched controls [Lp(a) ≤20th percentile; ≤7 nmol/L] were included. Mean age was 58 ± 15 years, 56.7% were female, and 30.7% had a history of ASCVD. Individuals with Lp(a) levels >99th percentile had an OR of 2.64 for ASCVD [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.45–4.89] and 3.39 for MI (95% CI 1.56–7.94). Addition of Lp(a) to ASCVD risk algorithms led to 31% and 63% being reclassified into a higher risk category for Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) and Second Manifestations of ARTerial disease (SMART), respectively. Conclusion The prevalence of ASCVD is nearly three-fold higher in adults with Lp(a) >99th percentile compared with matched subjects with Lp(a) ≤20th percentile. In individuals with very high Lp(a), addition of Lp(a) resulted in one-third of patients being reclassified in primary prevention, and over half being reclassified in secondary prevention.

Introduction Women with inherited platelet receptor defects (IPRD) may have an increased risk of heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB) and postpartum haemorrhage (PPH). Aim To present a systematic overview of the literature on the prevalence and management of menstrual and obstetrical bleeding in women with IPRD. Methods Electronic databases were searched for original patient data on the prevalence and management of HMB and PPH in women with known IPRD or who were being investigated for IPRD. Results Sixty‐nine papers (61 case reports/series and 8 cohort studies) were included. Overall, studies were rated as ‘poor quality’. The included cohort studies reported HMB in 25% (13/52) of women with Bernard‐Soulier syndrome and in 22.1% (34/154) of women with Glanzmann thrombasthenia. In total, 164 deliveries in women with IPRD were described. Excessive bleeding occurred in 16.9% (11/65) of deliveries described in the largest cohort. PPH occurred in 63.2% (55/87) of deliveries described in case reports/series. PPH occurred in 73.7% (14/19) of deliveries that were not covered by prophylaxis compared with 54.2% (32/59) of deliveries that were (OR = 2.36, 95% CI 0.75‐7.40). Neonatal bleeding complications were reported in 10.0% (8/80) of deliveries. In all (6/6) deliveries with neonatal bleeding complications wherein the presence of alloantibodies was investigated, either antiplatelet or anti‐HLA antibodies were detected. Discussion/Conclusion Menstrual and particularly obstetrical bleeding problems frequently occur in women with IPRD, based on small case reports and series of poor quality. International collaboration, preferably on prospective studies, is needed to improve clinical management of women‐specific bleeding in IPRD.

No abstract