Patel, Neel Navinkumar

Importance Elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular disease, the leading cause of premature death worldwide. Assessing the LDL-C–related burden is critical for guiding prevention and treatment strategies. Objectives To estimate the global, regional, and national burden of ischemic heart disease and ischemic stroke attributable to elevated LDL-C (relative to 35-54 mg/dL) from 1990 to 2023 and to quantify the contributions of population growth, aging, risk-deleted burden, and exposure changes to burden trends. Design, Setting, and Population This comparative risk assessment, part of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2023, estimated population-level LDL-C exposure and associated health loss in 204 countries and territories. Mean LDL-C levels were estimated using spatiotemporal gaussian process regression based on 806 studies across 161 countries. Relative risks were derived from meta-analyses of 38 randomized clinical trials. Population-attributable fractions for deaths and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) were estimated by age and sex for adults aged 25 years or older from 1990 to 2023, with 95% uncertainty intervals. Exposure Population-level LDL-C concentrations. Main Outcomes and Measures Population-attributable fractions, counts, and rates (all ages and age standardized per 100 000) of LDL-C–attributable deaths and DALYs from ischemic heart disease and ischemic stroke, with uncertainty intervals. Results In 2023, elevated LDL-C accounted for 3.6 million deaths (95% uncertainty interval, 2.2-5.4 million; 6.0% of global mortality) and 90.7 million DALYs (95% uncertainty interval, 58.9-123.3 million; 3.2% of DALYs). Although global all-ages rates remained stable, age-standardized death and DALY rates decreased by 45.6% and 39.5%, respectively, since 1990. In 2023, age-standardized LDL-C–attributable DALY rates were highest in Eastern Europe and lowest in high-income Asia-Pacific. One-third of the global LDL-C burden occurred in India and China. Population growth and aging drove the increasing burden, with notable regional disparities in LDL-C exposure and risk-deleted DALY rates shifting toward middle-sociodemographic settings. Conclusions and Relevance Despite declining age-standardized rates, the absolute LDL-C burden has increased since 1990 due to demographic changes and has shifted toward middle-sociodemographic countries. Measurement and surveillance gaps persist. Strengthened prevention, diagnosis, and treatment access strategies are essential to mitigate the health burden of LDL-C.

Introduction: Tobacco use is a known risk factor for stroke and other cardiovascular diseases. However, the relationship between e-cigarette smoking and stroke is largely unknown. Hypothesis: This study aims to assess the effect of e-cigarettes among people who have had a history of stroke. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was performed using the NHANES database from 2015 to 2018 in the US population. We identified participants 18 or older with a history of stroke and their smoking habits (e-cigarette, traditional, and dual smoking). The chi-square test, unpaired t-test, and multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the association of e-cigarette consumption among the stroke population. Results: Out of a total of 266,058 respondents, 79,825 were smokers [E-cigarette: 7,756 (9.72%); Traditional: 48,625(60.91%), Dual smokers: 23,444 (29.37%)] Overall prevalence of stroke was 5.41% (n=4194) amongst various types of smokers. Amongst females with stroke, the prevalence of e-cigarette use was higher compared to traditional smoking. (36.36% vs 33.91%; p<0.001) Mexican Americans (21.21% vs. 6.02%) and other Hispanics (24.24% vs. 7.70%) had a higher prevalence of e-cigarette use than traditional smoking. (p<0.001) E-cigarette smokers were having an early onset of stroke in comparison with dual and traditional smokers. (Median age in years: 48 vs. 50 vs. 59, respectively; p<0.001). Stroke was more prevalent amongst traditional smokers compared to e-cigarette and dual smokers (6.75% vs. 1.09% vs. 3.72% p<0.001). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, the odds of having a history of stroke were higher amongst e-cigarettes in comparison with traditional smokers. (aOR:1.15; 95%CI: 1.15-1.16; p<0.001). Conclusion: Although stroke was more prevalent in traditional smokers, e-cigarette smokers had early-onset and higher odds of stroke compared to traditional smokers. More prospective studies are needed to evaluate the long-term effects and safety of e-cigarettes to mitigate the risk of cardio and cerebrovascular disorders.