4.4 Article

Statin safety: An overview and assessment of the data-2005

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 97, 期 8A, 页码 6C-26C

出版社

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.12.006

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors, or statin drugs, have been studied in numerous controlled human research trials involving hundreds of thousands of study participants. Statins have been prescribed for millions of patients. Based on this vast research and clinical experience, statins have been shown to improve lipid blood levels and reduce atherosclerotic coronary artery disease (CAD) risk, resulting in reduced CAD morbidity and mortality, and in several studies, reduced overall (all-cause) mortality. From a safety perspective, both research trial evidence and clinical practice experience have demonstrated that statins are generally well tolerated. However, as with all pharmaceuticals, safety considerations exist with both monotherapy and combination statin therapy, mainly involving potential adverse effects on muscle, liver, kidney, and the nervous system. The evidence supporting statin-related potential adverse experiences on these organ systems is sometimes strong and based on clear clinical trial evidence (such as the increased risk of muscle enzyme elevation with higher statin doses). The evidence is at other times more speculative, being based on case reports and inconclusive clinical trial data (such as possible favorable or unfavorable effects of statins on cognition). Because the use of statins is so widespread, it is useful for the clinician to understand statin safety issues and the level of available evidence supporting the contention that various adverse effects are caused by statins. This review presents an assessment of statin safety based on an overview of the current statin safety data and their clinical implications. (c) 2006 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.4
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