| 21. |
|
|
| 22. |
- Jander, Nikolaus, et al.
(författare)
-
Outcome of Patients With Low-Gradient "Severe" Aortic Stenosis and Preserved Ejection Fraction
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Circulation. - 1524-4539 .- 0009-7322. ; 123:8, s. 887-895
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background-Retrospective studies have suggested that patients with a low transvalvular gradient in the presence of an aortic valve area <1.0 cm(2) and normal ejection fraction may represent a subgroup with an advanced stage of aortic valve disease, reduced stroke volume, and poor prognosis requiring early surgery. We therefore evaluated the outcome of patients with low-gradient "severe" stenosis (defined as aortic valve area < 1.0 cm(2) and mean gradient <= 40 mm Hg) in the prospective Simvastatin and Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis (SEAS) study. Methods and Results-Outcome in patients with low-gradient "severe" aortic stenosis was compared with outcome in patients with moderate stenosis (aortic valve area 1.0 to 1.5 cm(2); mean gradient 25 to 40 mm Hg). The primary end point of aortic valve events included death from cardiovascular causes, aortic valve replacement, and heart failure due to aortic stenosis. Secondary end points were major cardiovascular events and cardiovascular death. In 1525 asymptomatic patients (mean age, 67 +/- 10 years; ejection fraction, >= 55%), baseline echocardiography revealed low-gradient severe stenosis in 435 patients (29%) and moderate stenosis in 184 (12%). Left ventricular mass was lower in patients with low-gradient severe stenosis than in those with moderate stenosis (182 +/- 64 versus 212 +/- 68 g; P < 0.01). During 46 months of follow-up, aortic valve events occurred in 48.5% versus 44.6%, respectively (P=0.37; major cardiovascular events, 50.9% versus 48.5%, P=0.58; cardiovascular death, 7.8% versus 4.9%, P=0.19). Low-gradient severe stenosis patients with reduced stroke volume index (<= 35 mL/m(2); n=223) had aortic valve events comparable to those in patients with normal stroke volume index (46.2% versus 50.9%; P=0.53). Conclusions-Patients with low-gradient "severe" aortic stenosis and normal ejection fraction have an outcome similar to that in patients with moderate stenosis. (Circulation. 2011;123:887-895.)
|
|
| 23. |
|
|
| 24. |
- Jardine, Alan G., et al.
(författare)
-
Fluvastatin prevents cardiac death and myocardial infarction in renal transplant recipients : post-hoc subgroup analyses of the ALERT Study
- 2004
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Transplantation. - : Elsevier BV. - 1600-6135 .- 1600-6143. ; 4:6, s. 988-995
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Renal transplant recipients have a greatly increased risk of premature cardiovascular disease. The ALERT study was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of fluvastatin (40-80 mg/day) in 2102 renal transplant recipients followed for 5-6 years. The main study used a composite cardiac end-point including myocardial infarction, cardiac death and cardiac interventions. Although reduced by fluvastatin, this primary end-point failed to achieve statistical significance thus precluding analysis of predefined subgroups. Therefore, in the present survival analysis, we used an alternative primary end-point of cardiac death or definite nonfatal myocardial infarction (as used in other cardiac outcome trials) which was significantly reduced by Fluvastatin therapy and permits subgroup analysis. Fluvastatin reduced LDL-cholesterol by 1 mmol/L compared with placebo, and the incidence of cardiac death or definite myocardial infarction was reduced from 104 to 70 events (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.48, 0.88; p = 0.005). Fluvastatin use was associated with reduction in cardiac death or nonfatal myocardial infarction, which achieved statistical significance in many subgroups. The subgroups included patients at lower cardiovascular risk, who were younger, nondiabetic, nonsmokers and without pre-existing CVD. These data support the early introduction of statins following renal transplantation.
|
|
| 25. |
|
|
| 26. |
- Kastelein, John J. P., et al.
(författare)
-
Lipids, apolipoproteins, and their ratios in relation to cardiovascular events with statin treatment
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Circulation. - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539. ; 117:23, s. 3002-3009
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background - Low-density lipoprotein (LDL)cholesterol is the principal target of lipid-lowering therapy, but recent evidence has suggested more appropriate targets. We compared the relationships of on-treatment levels of LDL cholesterol, non-high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B, as well as ratios of total/HDL cholesterol, LDL/HDL cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B/A-I, with the occurrence of cardiovascular events in patients receiving statin therapy. Methods and Results - A post hoc analysis was performed that combined data from 2 prospective, randomized clinical trials in which 10 001 ("Treating to New Targets") and 8888 ("Incremental Decrease in End Points through Aggressive Lipid Lowering") patients with established coronary heart disease were assigned to usual-dose or high-dose statin treatment. In models with LDL cholesterol, non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B were positively associated with cardiovascular outcome, whereas a positive relationship with LDL cholesterol was lost. In a model that contained non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B, neither was significant owing to collinearity. Total/HDL cholesterol ratio and the apolipoprotein B/A-I ratio in particular were each more closely associated with outcome than any of the individual proatherogenic lipoprotein parameters. Conclusions - In patients receiving statin therapy, on-treatment levels of non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B were more closely associated with cardiovascular outcome than levels of LDL cholesterol. Inclusion of measurements of the antiatherogenic lipoprotein fraction further strengthened the relationships. These data support the use of non-HDL cholesterol or apolipoprotein B as novel treatment targets for statin therapy. Given the absence of interventions that have been proven to consistently reduce cardiovascular disease risk through raising plasma levels of HDL cholesterol or apolipoprotein A-I, it seems premature to consider the ratio variables as clinically useful.
|
|
| 27. |
- Minners, Jan, et al.
(författare)
-
Adjusting parameters of aortic valve stenosis severity by body size
- 2014
-
Ingår i: Heart. - : BMJ. - 1355-6037 .- 1468-201X. ; 100:13, s. 1024-1030
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Adjustment of cardiac dimensions by measures of body size appears intuitively convincing and in patients with aortic stenosis, aortic valve area (AVA) is commonly adjusted by body surface area (BSA). However, there is little evidence to support such an approach. Objective To identify the adequate measure of body size for the adjustment of aortic stenosis severity. Methods Parameters of aortic stenosis severity (jet velocity, mean pressure gradient (MPG) and AVA) and measures of body size (height, weight, BSA and body mass index (BMI)) were analysed in 2843 consecutive patients with aortic stenosis (jet velocity >= 2.5 m/s) and related to outcomes in a second cohort of 1525 patients from the Simvastatin/Ezetimibe in Aortic Stenosis (SEAS) study. Results Whereas jet velocity and MPG were independent of body size, AVA was significantly correlated with height, weight, BSA and BMI (Pearson correlation coefficient (r) 0.319, 0.281, 0.317 and 0.126, respectively, all p<0.001) to the effect that larger patients presented with larger AVA (less severe stenosis). Of the anthropometric measures used for linear adjustment, BSA was most effective in eliminating the correlation between AVA and body size (r=0.007), rivalled only by allometric (non-linear) models, findings that are confirmed in 1525 prospectively followed patients from the SEAS study. Predictive accuracy for aortic valve events and cardiovascular death during 46 months of follow-up was unchanged by adjusting AVA, regardless of measure of body size (area under the receiver operating curve for AVA 0.72 (CI 0.58 to 0.87) versus, for example, AVA/BSA 0.75 (CI 0.61 to 0.88), p=0.22). Conclusions In the assessment of aortic stenosis, linear adjustment of AVA by BSA improves comparability between patients with diverging body size without, however, increasing the predictive accuracy for clinical events in a population with mild to moderate stenosis.
|
|
| 28. |
- Norby, Gudrun Elisabeth, et al.
(författare)
-
Effect of fluvastatin on cardiac outcomes in kidney transplant patients with systemic lupus erythematosus : a randomized placebo-controlled study
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Arthritis and Rheumatism. - : Wiley. - 0004-3591 .- 1529-0131. ; 60:4, s. 1060-1064
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: Patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), with or without end-stage renal failure, are at increased risk of premature cardiovascular disease. Although statin therapy has been found to reduce cardiovascular risk in the general population, its effectiveness in kidney transplant recipients with SLE has not been examined. This study was undertaken to investigate the effect of fluvastatin on cardiac end points in a randomized controlled trial of renal transplant patients with SLE. METHODS: Patients with SLE were identified from among participants in the Assessment of Lescol in Renal Transplantation trial, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the effect of fluvastatin (40-80 mg/day) on cardiovascular outcomes in renal transplant recipients. Patients were randomized to either a group receiving fluvastatin or a placebo group for the duration of the 5-6-year trial, and then invited to continue in a 2-year open-label extension during which all participants, regardless of original group, received fluvastatin. Patients were followed up for a total of 7-8 years for assessment of the primary end point of major cardiac events, comprising nonfatal myocardial infarction, cardiac death, and coronary intervention procedures. RESULTS: Fluvastatin reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels by 29.2% (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 18.3-40%), from a mean +/- SD of 4.0 +/- 0.9 mmoles/liter to 2.8 +/- 1.1 mmoles/liter, and total cholesterol by 19.6% (95% CI 11.7-27.5%), from 6.4 +/- 0.9 mmoles/liter to 5.1 +/- 1.1 mmoles/liter. Compared with placebo-treated patients, patients randomized to receive fluvastatin exhibited a 73.4% reduction in the risk of major cardiac events (relative risk 26.6 [95% CI 5.9-119.4], P = 0.064). CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the effect of fluvastatin on cardiac events in renal transplant recipients with SLE is similar to that observed with statin therapy in the renal transplant population as a whole.
|
|
| 29. |
- Olsson, Anders, et al.
(författare)
-
LDL cholesterol goals and cardiovascular risk during statin treatment: the IDEAL study
- 2011
-
Ingår i: EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR PREVENTION and REHABILITATION. - : Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. - 1741-8267. ; 18:2, s. 262-269
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: We assessed the proportion of patients treated with either simvastatin 20 or 40 mg or atorvastatin 80 mg who achieved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) goals of 2.5 or 2.0 mmol/l in the Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering (IDEAL) study. We explored how lipoprotein components related to cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes in these groups. Methods and results: For subjects who reached on-treatment LDL-C goals, Cox regression models were used to assess the ability of lipoprotein components to predict CVD events. Treatment with simvastatin or atorvastatin resulted in 40 per cent and 80 per cent of patients, respectively, reaching the 2.5 mmol/l goal and 12 per cent and 52 per cent, respectively, reaching the 2.0 mmol/l goal, after 1 year (all p andlt; 0.001 between groups). Adjusting for baseline LDL-C levels, hazard ratio (HR) for those reaching 2.0-2.5 mmol/l LDL-C versus those reaching andlt; 2.0 mmol/l was 1.16 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.33, p = 0.023). An increase of the apolipoprotein B/A1 (apoB/A1) ratio by 1 standard deviation in participants who reached 2.0 mmol/l showed a HR for CVD of 1.14 (95% CI, 1.04-1.25, p = 0.004). Conclusion: More CVD patients treated with atorvastatin than simvastatin achieved either LDL-C goal and those reaching the 2.0 mmol/l goal exhibited significantly less CVD than those only reaching 2.5 mmol/l. In those reaching the 2.0 mmol/l goal, the apoB/A1 ratio still bears a relation to CVD outcome. The use of apoB/A1 ratio may provide additional predictive value to that of LDL-C.
|
|
| 30. |
- Pedersen, Terje R, et al.
(författare)
-
Comparison of Atorvastatin 80 mg/day Versus Simvastatin 20 to 40 mg/day on Frequency of Cardiovascular Events Late (Five Years) After Acute Myocardial Infarction (from the Incremental Decrease in End Points Through Aggressive Lipid Lowering [IDEAL] Trial)
- 2010
-
Ingår i: AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY. - : Elsevier Science B. V., Amsterdam. - 0002-9149. ; 106:3, s. 354-359
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Previous studies have demonstrated that benefits of intensive statin therapy compared to standard statin therapy begin shortly after an acute event and are continued up to 2 years of follow-up. However, whether efficacy and safety of intensive statin therapy in patients with a recent cardiac event are maintained in longer-term follow-up has not been evaluated. We conducted a post hoc analysis of a subgroup of 999 patients who had a first acute myocardial infarction (MI) andlt;2 months before randomization in a prospective, open-label, blinded end-point evaluation trial of 8,888 patients with a history of MI that compared intensive statin therapy (atorvastatin 80 mg) to standard statin therapy (simvastatin 20 to 40 mg) over approximately 5 years of follow-up. We analyzed the same composite end point used in the Pravastatin or Atorvastatin Evaluation and Infection Therapy (PROVE IT) trial (death, MI, hospitalization for unstable angina, revascularization, and stroke). Rates of the composite end point were 44.7% (n = 226) in the simvastatin group and 37.9% (n = 187) in the atorvastatin group (hazard ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.99, p = 0.04). Although statistical power was smaller than that of the PROVE IT trial, the relative risk decrease observed at 5 years is consistent with that in the 2-year follow-up in PROVE IT. The 2 treatment regimens were well tolerated. In conclusion, our analysis provides support for the strategy of placing patients with recent MI on intensive statin therapy and maintaining the high dose over the long term, beyond 2 years.
|
|
