Various guidelines appear to be under the magnifying glass these days, with dissenters challenging the need to follow recommendations. This may be part of a healthy debate. But how about instances where cardiologists are penalized for following evidence-based recommendations?

The FDA’s Cardiovascular and Renal Drugs Advisory Committee voted 10-1 in favor of approval for the antiplatelet vorapaxar to reduce atherothrombotic events in patients with a history of MI.

A team of cardiologists at the Cleveland Clinic recommended a hybrid approach using previous and new guidelines for treating patients with high cholesterol levels who are at risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. They praised the simplicity of recently released guidelines but faulted their reliance on randomized clinical trial data and an untested risk calculator.

Although the Eighth Joint National Committee recently recommended raising the systolic blood pressure (SBP) goal from 140 mm Hg to 150 in people 60 years of age and older without diabetes mellitus or chronic kidney disease, five members of the panel disagreed in a viewpoint published online Jan. 14 in Annals of Internal Medicine. They argued that there was not sufficient evidence to increase the target SBP.

Aegerion Pharmaceuticals confirmed that it is under a federal magnifying glass again. The company disclosed in a financial statement that it was subpoenaed by the Department of Justice (DOJ) over its cholesterol drug, lomitapide.

The release of four prevention guidelines from the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA) raised eyebrows, particularly over the use of a new cardiovascular risk calculator and the abandonment of number targets for cholesterol management. 

With transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), proper patient selection plays a key role in successful outcomes. 

For men and women living with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), their bodies may be as profoundly affected as their minds.