Faculty Opinions recommendation of Smoking and all-cause mortality in older people: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Author(s):  
Nico van Zandwijk
2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
K Awad ◽  
M Mohammed ◽  
M M Zaki ◽  
A I Abushouk ◽  
G Y H Lip ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Current evidence from randomized controlled trials on statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in older people, especially those aged >75 years, is still lacking. Purpose We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies to extend the current evidence about association of statin use in older people primary prevention group with risk of CVD and mortality. Methods PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were searched from inception until March 18, 2021. We included observational studies (cohort or nested case-control) that compared statin use vs non-use for primary prevention of CVD in older people aged ≥65 years; provided that each of them reported the risk estimate on at least one of the following primary outcomes: all cause-mortality, CVD death, myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke. Risk estimates of each relevant outcome were pooled as a hazard ratio (HR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects meta-analysis model. Results Ten observational studies (9 cohort and one case-control study; n=872,845) fulfilled our criteria. The overall combined estimate suggested that statin therapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 0.86 [95% CI: 0.79 to 0.93]), CVD death (HR: 0.80 [95% CI: 0.78 to 0.81]), and stroke (HR: 0.85 [95% CI: 0.76 to 0.94]) and a non-significant association with risk of MI (HR: 0.74 [95% CI: 0.53 to 1.02]). The beneficial association of statins with the risk of all-cause mortality remained significant even at higher ages (>75 years old; HR: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.81 to 0.96]) and in both men (HR: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.74 to 0.76]) and women (HR: 0.85 [95% CI: 0.72 to 0.99]). However, this association with the risk of all-cause mortality remained significant only in those with DM (HR: 0.82 [95% CI: 0.68 to 0.98]) but not in those without DM. Conclusions Statin therapy in older people (aged ≥65 years) without CVD was associated with a 14%, 20% and 15% lower risk of all-cause mortality, CVD death and stroke, respectively. The beneficial association with the risk of all-cause mortality remained significant even at higher ages (>75 years old), in both men and women, and in individuals with DM, but not in those without DM. These observational findings support the need for trials to test benefits of statins in those above 75 years of age. FUNDunding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Figure 1. Results of the meta-analysis


2016 ◽  
Vol 44 ◽  
pp. 172-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bing Liu ◽  
Xinhua Hu ◽  
Qiang Zhang ◽  
Yichuan Fan ◽  
Jun Li ◽  
...  

BMC Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamal Awad ◽  
Maged Mohammed ◽  
Mahmoud Mohamed Zaki ◽  
Abdelrahman I. Abushouk ◽  
Gregory Y. H. Lip ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Current evidence from randomized controlled trials on statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in older people, especially those aged > 75 years, is still lacking. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies to extend the current evidence about the association of statin use in older people primary prevention group with risk of CVD and mortality. Methods PubMed, Scopus, and Embase were searched from inception until March 18, 2021. We included observational studies (cohort or nested case-control) that compared statin use vs non-use for primary prevention of CVD in older people aged ≥ 65 years; provided that each of them reported the risk estimate on at least one of the following primary outcomes: all cause-mortality, CVD death, myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke. Risk estimates of each relevant outcome were pooled as a hazard ratio (HR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects meta-analysis model. The quality of the evidence was rated using the GRADE approach. Results Ten observational studies (9 cohorts and one case-control study; n = 815,667) fulfilled our criteria. The overall combined estimate suggested that statin therapy was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 0.86 [95% CI 0.79 to 0.93]), CVD death (HR: 0.80 [95% CI 0.78 to 0.81]), and stroke (HR: 0.85 [95% CI 0.76 to 0.94]) and a non-significant association with risk of MI (HR 0.74 [95% CI 0.53 to 1.02]). The beneficial association of statins with the risk of all-cause mortality remained significant even at higher ages (> 75 years old; HR 0.88 [95% CI 0.81 to 0.96]) and in both men (HR: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.74 to 0.76]) and women (HR 0.85 [95% CI 0.72 to 0.99]). However, this association with the risk of all-cause mortality remained significant only in those with diabetes mellitus (DM) (HR 0.82 [95% CI 0.68 to 0.98]) but not in those without DM. The level of evidence of all the primary outcomes was rated as “very low.” Conclusions Statin therapy in older people (aged ≥ 65 years) without CVD was associated with a 14%, 20%, and 15% lower risk of all-cause mortality, CVD death, and stroke, respectively. The beneficial association with the risk of all-cause mortality remained significant even at higher ages (> 75 years old), in both men and women, and in individuals with DM, but not in those without DM. These observational findings support the need for trials to test the benefits of statins in those above 75 years of age.


2020 ◽  
Vol 90 ◽  
pp. 104177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorena K.B. Amaral ◽  
Mateus B. Souza ◽  
Mariana G.M. Campos ◽  
Vanessa A. Mendonça ◽  
Alessandra Bastone ◽  
...  

Critical Care ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleni Papoutsi ◽  
Vassilis G. Giannakoulis ◽  
Eleni Xourgia ◽  
Christina Routsi ◽  
Anastasia Kotanidou ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Although several international guidelines recommend early over late intubation of patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), this issue is still controversial. We aimed to investigate the effect (if any) of timing of intubation on clinical outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19 by carrying out a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods PubMed and Scopus were systematically searched, while references and preprint servers were explored, for relevant articles up to December 26, 2020, to identify studies which reported on mortality and/or morbidity of patients with COVID-19 undergoing early versus late intubation. “Early” was defined as intubation within 24 h from intensive care unit (ICU) admission, while “late” as intubation at any time after 24 h of ICU admission. All-cause mortality and duration of mechanical ventilation (MV) were the primary outcomes of the meta-analysis. Pooled risk ratio (RR), pooled mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random effects model. The meta-analysis was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020222147). Results A total of 12 studies, involving 8944 critically ill patients with COVID-19, were included. There was no statistically detectable difference on all-cause mortality between patients undergoing early versus late intubation (3981 deaths; 45.4% versus 39.1%; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.99–1.15, p = 0.08). This was also the case for duration of MV (1892 patients; MD − 0.58 days, 95% CI − 3.06 to 1.89 days, p = 0.65). In a sensitivity analysis using an alternate definition of early/late intubation, intubation without versus with a prior trial of high-flow nasal cannula or noninvasive mechanical ventilation was still not associated with a statistically detectable difference on all-cause mortality (1128 deaths; 48.9% versus 42.5%; RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.99–1.25, p = 0.08). Conclusions The synthesized evidence suggests that timing of intubation may have no effect on mortality and morbidity of critically ill patients with COVID-19. These results might justify a wait-and-see approach, which may lead to fewer intubations. Relevant guidelines may therefore need to be updated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document