Comparisson of Different Cardiovascular Risk Scores in Newly Diagnosed Hyperlipidemia Patients and Their Relations with Metabolic Syndrome

Abstract

Aim:Today, there are many risk calculation methods. In this study, we aimed to compare SCORE, QRISK2, BNF, ASSIGN and Framingham risk scorings for patients who have been first detected that they have hyperlipidemia and to evaluate the relation between metabolic syndrome criteria and cardiovascular risk scorings for the same group patients.Methods:We included 216 female, 84 male newly diagnosed hyperlipidemic patients. Lipid levels measured using enzymatic calorimetric methods. We also measured weight, height, waist circumference of patients. We used NCEP ATP III for metabolic syndrome identification. For 10 years cardiovascular risk assessment we performed Framingham, SCORE, QRISK 2, ASSIGN, BNF score systems.Results:The difference between these four different methods found statistically significant with Friedman test (p<0.001). With post-hoc dual analysis, we found that Framinghan score was different from the other 3 methods, QRISK2 score was different from Framingham and ASSIGN score results, ASSIGN score was different from other 3 score results and BNF score was also different from Framingham and ASSIGN score results. Only between BNF-QRISK2 scores we could not find difference.Conclusions:This study showed that when four different cardiovascular risk score methods are compared in newly diagnosed hyperlipidemia patients, only BNF and QRISK2 scorings revealed similar results but Framingham and ASSIGN scorings resulted differently either from each other or BNF and QRISK2.

Keywords

• metabolic syndrome
• hyperlipidemia
• cardiovascular risk scores