Effect of Combinations of Drugs on All-Cause Mortality in Patients With Ischemic Heart Disease: Nested Case-control Analysis

2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (8) ◽  
pp. 3
Author(s):  
J. Hippisley-Cox ◽  
C. Coupland
2017 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 288-293 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Holmberg ◽  
Anna Rignell-Hydbom ◽  
Christian H Lindh ◽  
Bo AG Jönsson ◽  
Anders Thelin ◽  
...  

Toxics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10) ◽  
pp. 239
Author(s):  
Yewon Bahng ◽  
Kiook Baek ◽  
Jong-Tae Park ◽  
Won-Jun Choi ◽  
Kyeongmin Kwak

Although there are several case reports showing that carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning causes ischemic heart disease (IHD), no large-scale epidemiological studies have shown a significant association between the two. To investigate the association between CO poisoning and IHD, a nested case-control study of 28,113 patients who experienced CO poisoning and 28,113 controls matched by sex and age was performed using the nationwide health database of South Korea. Based on a conditional logistic regression, there was a significantly higher risk of IHD among the CO poisoning group than among the control group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.87–2.49). The risk of IHD after CO poisoning was higher among the younger age group under 40 years (adjusted HR, 4.85; 95% CI, 3.20–7.35), and it was much greater among those with comorbidities (adjusted HR, 10.69; 95% CI, 2.41–47.51). The risk of IHD was the highest within the first two years after CO poisoning (adjusted HR, 11.12; 95% CI, 4.54–27.22). Even if more than six years had passed, the risk was still significantly higher than among the control group (adjusted HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.27–1.89). The analyses imply that CO poisoning is associated with an increased risk of IHD.


2016 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 593-604 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie K Jepsen ◽  
Anne Langsted ◽  
Anette Varbo ◽  
Lia E Bang ◽  
Pia R Kamstrup ◽  
...  

Abstract BACKGROUND Increased concentrations of remnant cholesterol are causally associated with increased risk of ischemic heart disease. We tested the hypothesis that increased remnant cholesterol is a risk factor for all-cause mortality in patients with ischemic heart disease. METHODS We included 5414 Danish patients diagnosed with ischemic heart disease. Patients on statins were not excluded. Calculated remnant cholesterol was nonfasting total cholesterol minus LDL and HDL cholesterol. During 35836 person-years of follow-up, 1319 patients died. RESULTS We examined both calculated and directly measured remnant cholesterol; importantly, however, measured remnant cholesterol made up only 9% of calculated remnant cholesterol at nonfasting triglyceride concentrations <1 mmol/L (89 mg/dL) and only 43% at triglycerides >5 mmol/L (443 mg/dL). Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios for all-cause mortality compared with patients with calculated remnant cholesterol concentrations in the 0 to 60th percentiles were 1.2 (95% CI, 1.1–1.4) for patients in the 61st to 80th percentiles, 1.3 (1.1–1.5) for the 81st to 90th percentiles, 1.5 (1.1–1.8) for the 91st to 95th percentiles, and 1.6 (1.2–2.0) for patients in the 96th to 100th percentiles (trend, P < 0.001). Corresponding values for measured remnant cholesterol were 1.0 (0.8–1.1), 1.2 (1.0–1.4), 1.1 (0.9–1.5), and 1.3 (1.1–1.7) (trend, P = 0.006), and for measured LDL cholesterol 1.0 (0.9–1.1), 1.0 (0.8–1.2), 1.0 (0.8–1.3), and 1.1 (0.8–1.4) (trend, P = 0.88). Cumulative survival was reduced in patients with calculated remnant cholesterol ≥1 mmol/L (39 mg/dL) vs <1 mmol/L [log-rank, P = 9 × 10−6; hazard ratio 1.3 (1.2–1.5)], but not in patients with measured LDL cholesterol ≥3 mmol/L (116 mg/dL) vs <3 mmol/L [P = 0.76; hazard ratio 1.0 (0.9–1.1)]. CONCLUSIONS Increased concentrations of both calculated and measured remnant cholesterol were associated with increased all-cause mortality in patients with ischemic heart disease, which was not the case for increased concentrations of measured LDL cholesterol. This suggests that increased concentrations of remnant cholesterol explain part of the residual risk of all-cause mortality in patients with ischemic heart disease.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
T Imaoka ◽  
N Umemoto ◽  
S Oshima

Abstract Background In clinical setting, ischemic heart disease is a challenging problem in hemodialysis (HD) population. Coronary flow reserve (CFR) measured by 13 ammonia positron emitting tomography (13NH3PET) is an established and reliable modality for detecting coronary artery disease. Furthermore, some prior studies show CFR is an important and independent predictor for cardiovascular event and mortality. On the other hand, HD patients with malnutrition status have poor prognosis. We have reported about the relationship between cardiovascular events and geriatric nutrition risk index (GNRI). Now, we wonder the predictability of combination of CFR and GNRI. Methods and result We collected 438 consecutive HD patients who received 13NH3PET in our hospital suspected for ischemic heart disease. 29 patients were excluded due to undergoing coronary revascularization within 60 days, 103 patients were excluded due to incomplete database. In total, 306 HD patients were classified into 4 group according the median value of CFR (1.99) and GNRI (97.73); Low CFR Low GNRI group (n=77), High CFR and Low GNRI group (n=76), Low CFR High GNRI group (n=78) and High CFR High GNRI group (n=75). We collected their follow up data up to 1544 days (median 833 days) about all-cause mortality and cardiovascular (CV) mortality. Surprisingly, there is no mortality event in High CFR High GNRI group. We analyzed about all-cause mortality, CV mortality. Kaplan-Meyer analysis shows there are statistically intergroup differences in each (all-cause mortality; log rank p<0.01, CV mortality; log rank p=0.02). Furthermore, we calculated area under the curve (AUC) analysis, net reclassification improvement (NRI) and integrated discrimination improvement (IDI)m adding GNRI and CFR on conventional risk factors. There are intergroup differences for all-cause mortality in AUC [conventional risk factors, +GNRI, +GNRI+CFR; 0.70, 0.72 (p=0.29), 0.79 (p<0.01)], NRI [+GNRI; 0.32 (p=0.04), +GNRI+CFR 0.82 (p<0.01)] and IDI [+GNRI; 0.01 (p=0.05), +GNRI+CFR 0.09 (p<0.01)]. Conclusion HD patients with low CFR and malnutrition status has statistically significant poorer prognosis comparing HD patients with high CFR and without malnutrition status. Adding combination of GNRI and CFR on conventional risk factors improves the predictability of HD population's prognosis. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document