3.8 Article

Prevalence of traditional cardiovascular risk factors and evaluation of cardiovascular risk using three risk equations in Nigerians living with human immunodeficiency virus

Journal

NORTH AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCES
Volume 5, Issue 12, Pages 680-688

Publisher

WOLTERS KLUWER MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.4103/1947-2714.123251

Keywords

Cardiovascular risk factors; Risk scores; Human immunodeficiency virus

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Reports from middle- and high-income countries suggest that the improved health outcome from highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) in people living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLWHIV) is being mitigated by increase in deaths from cardiovascular disease (CVD). Aims: This study was to determine the prevalence of traditional cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) and the 10-year cardiovascular risk using three risk equations in PLWHIV with no overt vascular disease. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study involved 265 PLWHIV. We classified the subjects as having low, moderate or high cardiovascular risk using the Framingham, World Health Organization/International Society of Hypertension (WHO/ISH) and Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE) equations. Results: The mean age of the cohort was 38.7 +/- 8.7 years; 179 (67.5%) were females and 214 (80.8%) were on HAART. The prevalent traditional CVRFs in our cohort were low physical activity (66%), low HDL-C (49.1%), hypercholesterolaemia (33.6%), BMI >= 25 kg/m(2) (32.8%) and elevated LDL-C (28.3%). The prevalence of smoking was very low (1.9%). The prevalence of moderate to high 10-year coronary risk was 11.7, 12.8, and 12.8% according to the Framingham, WHO/ISH and SCORE risk equations, respectively. Conclusion: Most of our patients had low overall cardiovascular risk according to the three risk equations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available