4.5 Review

Comparative effectiveness and safety of statins as a class and of specific statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and network meta-analysis of randomized trials with 94,283 participants

期刊

AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL
卷 210, 期 -, 页码 18-28

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ahj.2018.12.007

关键词

-

资金

  1. Swiss Federal Excellence Scholarship [2015.0858]
  2. North-South Cooperation at the University of Zurich [F-42320-71-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background The current guidelines of statins for primary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention were based on results from systematic reviews and meta-analyses that suffer from limitations. Methods We searched in PubMed for existing systematic reviews and individual open-label or double-blinded randomized controlled trials that compared a statin with a placebo or another, which were published in English until January 01, 2018. We performed a random-effect pairwise meta-analysis of all statins as a class and network meta-analysis for the specific statins on different benefit and harm outcomes. Results In the pairwise meta-analyses, statins as a class showed statistically significant risk reductions on non-fatal MI (risk ratio [RR] 0.62, 95% CI 0.53-0.72), CVD mortality (RR 0.80, 0.71-0.91), all-cause mortality (RR 0.89, 0.85-0.93), non-fatal stroke (RR 0.83, 0.75-0.92), unstable angina (RR 0.75, 0.63-0.91), and composite major cardiovascular events (RR 0.74, 0.67-0.81). Statins increased statistically significantly relative and absolute risks of myopathy (RR 1.08, 1.01-1.15; Risk difference [RD] 13, 2-24 per 10,000 person-years); renal dysfunction (RR 1.12, 1.00-1.26; RD 16, 0-36 per 10,000 personyears); and hepatic dysfunction (RR 1.16, 1.02-1.31; RD 8, 1-16 per 10,000 person-years). The drug-level network metaanalyses showed that atorvastatin and rosuvastatin were most effective in reducing CVD events while atorvastatin appeared to have the best safety profile. Conclusions All statins showed statistically significant risk reduction of CVD and all-cause mortality in primary prevention populations while increasing the risk for some harm risks. However, the benefit-harm profile differed by statin type. A quantitative assessment of the benefit-harm balance is thus needed since meta-analyses alone are insufficient to inform whether statins provide net benefit.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据