Tina Ken Schramm

Risk of Bleeding With Single, Dual, or Triple Therapy With Warfarin, Aspirin, and Clopidogrel in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation

BACKGROUND Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) often require anticoagulation and platelet inhibition, but data are limited on the bleeding risk of combination therapy. METHODS We performed a cohort study using nationwide registries to identify all Danish patients surviving first-time hospitalization for AF between January 1, 1997, and December 31, 2006, and their posthospital therapy of warfarin, aspirin, clopidogrel, and combinations of these drugs. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate risks of nonfatal and fatal bleeding. RESULTS A total of 82,854 of 118,606 patients (69.9%) surviving AF hospitalization had at least 1 prescription filled for warfarin, aspirin, or clopidogrel after discharge. During mean (SD) follow-up of 3.3 (2.6) years, 13,573 patients (11.4%) experienced a nonfatal or fatal bleeding. The crude incidence rate for bleeding was highest for dual clopidogrel and warfarin therapy (13.9% per patient-year) and triple therapy (15.7% per patient-year). Using warfarin monotherapy as a reference, the hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for the combined end point was 0.93 (0.88-0.98) for aspirin, 1.06 (0.87-1.29) for clopidogrel, 1.66 (1.34-2.04) for aspirin-clopidogrel, 1.83 (1.72-1.96) for warfarin-aspirin, 3.08 (2.32-3.91) for warfarin-clopidogrel, and 3.70 (2.89-4.76) for warfarin-aspirin-clopidogrel. CONCLUSIONS In patients with AF, all combinations of warfarin, aspirin, and clopidogrel are associated with increased risk of nonfatal and fatal bleeding. Dual warfarin and clopidogrel therapy and triple therapy carried a more than 3-fold higher risk than did warfarin monotherapy.

Diabetes Patients Requiring Glucose-Lowering Therapy and Nondiabetics With a Prior Myocardial Infarction Carry the Same Cardiovascular Risk A Population Study of 3.3 Million People

Background— Previous studies reveal major differences in the estimated cardiovascular risk in diabetes mellitus, including uncertainty about the risk in young patients. Therefore, large studies of well-defined populations are needed. Methods and Results— All residents in Denmark ≥30 years of age were followed up for 5 years (1997 to 2002) by individual-level linkage of nationwide registers. Diabetes patients receiving glucose-lowering medications and nondiabetics with and without a prior myocardial infarction were compared. At baseline, 71 801 (2.2%) had diabetes mellitus and 79 575 (2.4%) had a prior myocardial infarction. Regardless of age, age-adjusted Cox proportional-hazard ratios for cardiovascular death were 2.42 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.35 to 2.49) in men with diabetes mellitus without a prior myocardial infarction and 2.44 (95% CI, 2.39 to 2.49) in nondiabetic men with a prior myocardial infarction (P=0.60), with nondiabetics without a prior myocardial infarction as the reference. Results for women were 2.45 (95% CI, 2.38 to 2.51) and 2.62 (95% CI, 2.55 to 2.69) (P=0.001), respectively. For the composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, and cardiovascular death, the hazard ratios in men with diabetes only were 2.32 (95% CI, 2.27 to 2.38) and 2.48 (95% CI, 2.43 to 2.54) in those with a prior myocardial infarction only (P=0.001). Results for women were 2.48 (95% CI, 2.43 to 2.54) and 2.71 (95% CI, 2.65 to 2.78) (P=0.001), respectively. Risks were similar for both diabetes types. Analyses with adjustments for comorbidity, socioeconomic status, and prophylactic medical treatment showed similar results, and propensity score–based matched-pair analyses supported these findings. Conclusions— Patients requiring glucose-lowering therapy who were ≥30 years of age exhibited a cardiovascular risk comparable to nondiabetics with a prior myocardial infarction, regardless of sex and diabetes type. Therefore, requirement for glucose-lowering therapy should prompt intensive prophylactic treatment for cardiovascular diseases.

Risk of death or reinfarction associated with the use of selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors and nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs after acute myocardial infarction.

Background— The selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors and other nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been associated with increased cardiovascular risk, but the risk in patients with established cardiovascular disease is unknown. We analyzed the risk of rehospitalization for acute myocardial infarction (MI) and death related to the use of NSAIDs including selective COX-2 inhibitors in patients with prior MI. Methods and Results— All patients with first-time MI between 1995 and 2002 as well as all prescription claims for NSAIDs after discharge were identified from nationwide Danish administrative registers. The risk of death and rehospitalization for MI associated with the use of selective COX-2 inhibitors and nonselective NSAIDs was studied with the use of multivariable proportional hazards models and case-crossover analysis. A total of 58 432 patients were discharged alive and included in the study; 9773 experienced rehospitalization for MI, and 16 573 died. A total of 5.2% of patients received rofecoxib, 4.3% celecoxib, 17.5% ibuprofen, 10.6% diclofenac, and 12.7% other NSAIDs. For any use of rofecoxib, celecoxib, ibuprofen, diclofenac, and other NSAIDs, the hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for death were 2.80 (2.41 to 3.25; for rofecoxib), 2.57 (2.15 to 3.08; for celecoxib), 1.50 (1.36 to 1.67; for ibuprofen), 2.40 (2.09 to 2.80; for diclofenac), and 1.29 (1.16 to 1.43; for other NSAIDS); there were dose-related increases in risk of death for all of the drugs. There were trends for increased risk of rehospitalization for MI associated with the use of both the selective COX-2 inhibitors and the nonselective NSAIDs. Conclusions— Selective COX-2 inhibitors in all dosages and nonselective NSAIDs in high dosages increase mortality in patients with previous MI and should therefore be used with particular caution in these patients.

‘Mortality and cardiovascular risk associated with different insulin secretagogues compared with metformin in type 2 diabetes, with or without a previous myocardial infarction: a nationwide study’

AIMS The impact of insulin secretagogues (ISs) on long-term major clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetes remains unclear. We examined mortality and cardiovascular risk associated with all available ISs compared with metformin in a nationwide study. METHODS AND RESULTS All Danish residents >20 years, initiating single-agent ISs or metformin between 1997 and 2006 were followed for up to 9 years (median 3.3 years) by individual-level linkage of nationwide registers. All-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and the composite of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and cardiovascular mortality associated with individual ISs were investigated in patients with or without previous MI by multivariable Cox proportional-hazard analyses including propensity analyses. A total of 107 806 subjects were included, of whom 9607 had previous MI. Compared with metformin, glimepiride (hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals): 1.32 (1.24-1.40), glibenclamide: 1.19 (1.11-1.28), glipizide: 1.27 (1.17-1.38), and tolbutamide: 1.28 (1.17-1.39) were associated with increased all-cause mortality in patients without previous MI. The corresponding results for patients with previous MI were as follows: glimepiride: 1.30 (1.11-1.44), glibenclamide: 1.47 (1.22-1.76), glipizide: 1.53 (1.23-1.89), and tolbutamide: 1.47 (1.17-1.84). Results for gliclazide [1.05 (0.94-1.16) and 0.90 (0.68-1.20)] and repaglinide and [0.97 (0.81-1.15) and 1.29 (0.86-1.94)] were not statistically different from metformin in both patients without and with previous MI, respectively. Results were similar for cardiovascular mortality and for the composite endpoint. CONCLUSION Monotherapy with the most used ISs, including glimepiride, glibenclamide, glipizide, and tolbutamide, seems to be associated with increased mortality and cardiovascular risk compared with metformin. Gliclazide and repaglinide appear to be associated with a lower risk than other ISs.

Increased mortality and cardiovascular morbidity associated with use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in chronic heart failure.

BACKGROUND Accumulating evidence indicates increased cardiovascular risk associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use, in particular in patients with established cardiovascular disease. We studied the risk of death and hospitalization because of acute myocardial infarction and heart failure (HF) associated with use of NSAIDs in an unselected cohort of patients with HF. METHODS We identified 107,092 patients surviving their first hospitalization because of HF between January 1, 1995, and December 31, 2004, and their subsequent use of NSAIDs from individual-level linkage of nationwide registries of hospitalization and drug dispensing by pharmacies in Denmark. Data analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for age, sex, calendar year, comorbidity, medical treatment, and severity of disease, and propensity-based risk-stratified models and case-crossover models. RESULTS A total of 36,354 patients (33.9%) claimed at least 1 prescription of an NSAID after discharge; 60,974 (56.9%) died, and 8970 (8.4%) and 39,984 (37.5%) were hospitalized with myocardial infarction or HF, respectively. The hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for death was 1.70 (1.58-1.82), 1.75 (1.63-1.88), 1.31 (1.25-1.37), 2.08 (1.95-2.21), 1.22 (1.07-1.39), and 1.28 (1.21-1.35) for rofecoxib, celecoxib, ibuprofen, diclofenac, naproxen, and other NSAIDs, respectively. Furthermore, there was a dose-dependent increase in risk of death and increased risk of hospitalization because of myocardial infarction and HF. Propensity-based risk-stratified analysis and case-crossover models yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS NSAIDs are frequently used in patients with HF and are associated with increased risk of death and cardiovascular morbidity. Inasmuch as even commonly used NSAIDs exerted increased risk, the balance between risk and benefit requires careful consideration when any NSAID is given to patients with HF.

Persistent Use of Evidence-Based Pharmacotherapy in Heart Failure Is Associated With Improved Outcomes

Background— Undertreatment with recommended pharmacotherapy is a common problem in heart failure and may influence prognosis. We studied initiation and persistence of evidence-based pharmacotherapy in 107 092 patients discharged after first hospitalization for heart failure in Denmark from 1995 to 2004. Methods and Results— Prescriptions of dispensed medication and mortality were identified by an individual-level linkage of nationwide registers. Inclusion was irrespective of left ventricular function. Treatment with renin-angiotensin inhibitors (eg, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin-2 receptor blockers), &bgr;-blockers, spironolactone, and statins was initiated in 43%, 27%, 19%, and 19% of patients, respectively. Patients who did not initiate treatment within 90 days of discharge had a low probability of later treatment initiation. Treatment dosages were in general only 50% of target dosages and were not increased during long-term treatment. Short breaks in therapy were common, but most patients reinitiated treatment. Five years after initiation of treatment, 79% patients were still on renin-angiotensin inhibitors, 65% on &bgr;-blockers, 56% on spironolactone, and 83% on statins. Notably, multiple drug treatment and increased severity of heart failure was associated with persistence of treatment. Nonpersistence with renin-angiotensin inhibitors, &bgr;-blockers, and statins was associated with increased mortality with hazard ratios for death of 1.37 (95% CI, 1.31 to 1.42), 1.25 (95% CI, 1.19 to 1.32), 1.88 (95% CI, 1.67 to 2.12), respectively. Conclusions— Persistence of treatment was high once medication was started, but treatment dosages were below recommended dosages. Increased severity of heart failure or increased number of concomitant medications did not worsen persistence, but nonpersistence identified a high-risk population of patients who required special attention. A focused effort on early treatment initiation, appropriate dosages, and persistence with the regimen is likely to provide long-term benefit.

Location of Cardiac Arrest in a City Center Strategic Placement of Automated External Defibrillators in Public Locations

Background— Public-access defibrillation with automated external defibrillators (AEDs) is being implemented in many countries worldwide with considerable financial implications. The potential benefit and economic consequences of focused or unfocused AED deployment are unknown. Methods and Results— All cardiac arrests in public in Copenhagen, Denmark, from 1994 through 2005 were geographically located, as were 104 public AEDs placed by local initiatives. In accordance with European Resuscitation Council and American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines, areas with a high incidence of cardiac arrests were defined as those with 1 cardiac arrest every 2 or 5 years, respectively. There were 1274 cardiac arrests in public locations. According to the European Resuscitation Council or AHA guidelines, AEDs needed to be deployed in 1.2% and 10.6% of the city area, providing coverage for 19.5% (n=249) and 66.8% (n=851) of all cardiac arrests, respectively. The excessive cost of such AED deployments was estimated to be

Cause-Specific Cardiovascular Risk Associated With Nonsteroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs Among Healthy Individuals

33 100 or

The pattern of use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) from 1997 to 2005: a nationwide study on 4.6 million people†‡

41 000 per additional quality-adjusted life year, whereas unguided AED placement covering the entire city had an estimated cost of

Differences Between Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest in Residential and Public Locations and Implications for Public-Access Defibrillation

108 700 per quality-adjusted life year. Areas with major train stations (1.8 arrests every 5 years per area), large public squares, and pedestrianized areas (0.6 arrests every 5 years per area) were main predictors of frequent cardiac arrests. Conclusion— To achieve wide AED coverage, AEDs need to be more widely distributed than recommended by the European Resuscitation Council guidelines but consistent with the American Heart Association guidelines. Strategic placement of AEDs is pivotal for public-access defibrillation, whereas with unguided initiatives, AEDs are likely to be placed inappropriately.