Article

Comparative determinants of 4-year cardiovascular event rates in stable outpatients at risk of or with atherothrombosis.

VA Boston Healthcare System, Brigham and Women's Hospital, and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02132, USA.
JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association (Impact Factor: 29.98). 09/2010; 304(12):1350-7.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Clinicians and trialists have difficulty with identifying which patients are highest risk for cardiovascular events. Prior ischemic events, polyvascular disease, and diabetes mellitus have all been identified as predictors of ischemic events, but their comparative contributions to future risk remain unclear.
To categorize the risk of cardiovascular events in stable outpatients with various initial manifestations of atherothrombosis using simple clinical descriptors.
Outpatients with coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, or peripheral arterial disease or with multiple risk factors for atherothrombosis were enrolled in the global Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) Registry and were followed up for as long as 4 years. Patients from 3647 centers in 29 countries were enrolled between 2003 and 2004 and followed up until 2008. Final database lock was in April 2009.
Rates of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke.
A total of 45,227 patients with baseline data were included in this 4-year analysis. During the follow-up period, a total of 5481 patients experienced at least 1 event, including 2315 with cardiovascular death, 1228 with myocardial infarction, 1898 with stroke, and 40 with both a myocardial infarction and stroke on the same day. Among patients with atherothrombosis, those with a prior history of ischemic events at baseline (n = 21,890) had the highest rate of subsequent ischemic events (18.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 17.4%-19.1%); patients with stable coronary, cerebrovascular, or peripheral artery disease (n = 15,264) had a lower risk (12.2%; 95% CI, 11.4%-12.9%); and patients without established atherothrombosis but with risk factors only (n = 8073) had the lowest risk (9.1%; 95% CI, 8.3%-9.9%) (P < .001 for all comparisons). In addition, in multivariable modeling, the presence of diabetes (hazard ratio [HR], 1.44; 95% CI, 1.36-1.53; P < .001), an ischemic event in the previous year (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.57-1.85; P < .001), and polyvascular disease (HR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.78-2.24; P < .001) each were associated with a significantly higher risk of the primary end point.
Clinical descriptors can assist clinicians in identifying high-risk patients within the broad range of risk for outpatients with atherothrombosis.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
189 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study is to explore the association of adverse cardiovascular events with B vitamins supplementation. Rev.Man 5.1 and Stata 11.0 software were applied for the meta-analysis. The number of cardiovascular events was collected and calculated using indicates of odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals in a fixed-effects or a random-effects model when appropriate. The study includes 15 studies which consists of 37,358 study objects (experimental group: 19,601; control group: 17,757). This study showed that the pooled ORs was 1.01 (95% CI = 0.96~1.06, P > 0.05) for objects with Experimental group (B vitamins supplementation) vs. Control group (placebo or regular treatment), which suggests no significant differences were found in the overall effect of the number of cardiovascular events between the two groups. Further stratification of subgroup analysis indicates no significant differences were found between the two groups as well. There were also no publication bias existing by the Egger's linear regression test (P > 0.05). Our result indicates that the number of cardiovascular events in experimental group using B vitamins supplementation during the treatment is equal to placebo or regular treatment group thus further studies is necessary.
    International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine 01/2014; 7(8):1923-30. · 1.42 Impact Factor
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology 08/2014; 64(8):845–847. · 15.34 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although nonadherence with evidence-based secondary prevention medications is common in patients with established atherothrombotic disease, long-term outcomes studies are scant. We assessed the prevalence and long-term outcomes of nonadherence to secondary prevention (antiplatelet agents, statins, and antihypertensive agents) medications in stable outpatients with established atherothrombosis (coronary, cerebrovascular, or peripheral artery disease) enrolled in the international REduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health registry.Methods Adherence with these medications in eligible patients at baseline and 1-year follow-up was assessed. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 4 years.ResultsA total of 37,154 patients with established atherothrombotic disease were included. Adherence rates with all evidence-based medications at baseline and 1 year were 46.7% and 48.2%, respectively. Nonadherence with any medication at baseline (hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.25) and at 1 year (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.28) were both significantly associated with an increased risk of the primary end point. The risk of all-cause mortality was similarly elevated. Corresponding numbers needed to treat were 31 and 25 patients for the composite end point and total mortality, respectively. This also was true for each disease-specific subgroup. Patients who were fully adherent at both time points had the lowest incidence of adverse outcomes, whereas patients who were nonadherent at both time points had the worst outcomes (P < .01).Conclusions Our analysis of a large international registry demonstrates that nonadherence with evidence-based secondary prevention therapies in patients with established atherothrombosis is associated with a significant increase in long-term adverse events, including mortality.
    The American Journal of Medicine 08/2013; 126(8):693-700.e1. · 5.30 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
50 Downloads
Available from
Jun 4, 2014