4.6 Article

Cardiovascular disease and mortality after a first episode of venous thromboembolism in young and middle-aged women

期刊

THROMBOSIS RESEARCH
卷 138, 期 -, 页码 80-85

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.thromres.2015.11.039

关键词

Cardiovascular disease; Cohort studies; Mortality; Venous thromboembolism; Women

资金

  1. Janssen-Cilag
  2. Novartis
  3. Organon
  4. Schering
  5. Wyeth
  6. AFA
  7. Center for Gender Medicine KI
  8. Swedish Foundation Women and Health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Patients with a history of venous thromboembolism (VTE) seem to have an increased risk of arterial cardiovascular disease (CVD). Objectives: To evaluate the risk of CVD and overall mortality after a first episode of VTE in women and to assess common risk factors for VTE and CVD. Patients/methods: We performed a cohort study inviting 1433 women with a previous VTE (exposed) and 1402 women without VTE (unexposed). The cohort was derived from TEHS, a Swedish population-based case-control study on risk factors for VTE in women age 18-64 years. The women were recruited in 2002-2009. During 2011 information on CVD and mortality was obtained from a questionnaire and from the Swedish Patient Register and the Cause of Death Register. Hazard ratios (HR) for CVD and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using Cox regression. In multivariate analyses we adjusted for age, smoking, diabetes mellitus, hypertension and body mass index. Results: 2108 (75%) women (mean age 47 +/- 13 years) accepted participation. During the total follow up of 11,920 person years 35 (3.2%, 95% CI 0.7-2.1) among the exposed and 14 (1.4%, 95% CI 0.2-4.3) among the unexposed had any CVD event. The adjusted HR for CVD was 2.0 (95% CI 1.1-3.9) the adjusted HR for mortality was 2.3 (95% CI 1.2-4.6) Conclusion: Women with a previous VTE had a two-fold increased risk of CVD and overall mortality. Adjusting for cardiovascular risk factors only modestly changed the estimates. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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