SS9. Long-term Benefit of Perioperative Statin Use in Patients Undergoing Vascular Surgery: Results from the DECREASE III Trial

Pharmacological treatment of vascular risk factors for reducing mortality and cardiovascular events in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological prophylaxis has been proven to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in individuals with atherosclerotic occlusive arterial disease. However, the role of prophylaxis in individuals with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) remains unclear. Several studies have shown that despite successful repair, those people with AAA have a poorer rate of survival than healthy controls. People with AAA have an increased prevalence of coronary heart disease and risk of cardiovascular events. Despite this association, little is known about the effectiveness of pharmacological prophylaxis in reducing cardiovascular risk in people with AAA. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the long-term effectiveness of antiplatelet, antihypertensive or lipid-lowering medication in reducing mortality and cardiovascular events in people with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

SEARCH METHODS

For this update the Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist (CIS) searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register (14 April 2016). In addition, the CIS searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2016, Issue 3) and trials registries (14 April 2016) and We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in which people with AAA were randomly allocated to one prophylactic treatment versus another, a different regimen of the same treatment, a placebo, or no treatment were eligible for inclusion in this review. Primary outcomes included all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, and completed quality assessment and data extraction. We resolved any disagreements by discussion. Only one study met the inclusion criteria of the review, therefore we were unable to perform meta-analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

No new studies met the inclusion criteria for this update. We included one randomised controlled trial in the review. A subgroup of 227 participants with AAA received either metoprolol (N = 111) or placebo (N = 116). There was no clear evidence that metoprolol reduced all-cause mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 1.41), cardiovascular death (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.76), AAA-related death (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.06 to 16.92) or increased nonfatal cardiovascular events (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.58 to 3.57) 30 days postoperatively. Furthermore, at six months postoperatively, estimated effects were compatible with benefit and harm for all-cause mortality (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.95), cardiovascular death (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.39) and nonfatal cardiovascular events (OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.59 to 3.35). Adverse drug effects were reported for the whole study population and were not available for the subgroup of participants with AAA. We considered the study to be at a generally low risk of bias. We downgraded the quality of the evidence for all outcomes to low. We downgraded the quality of evidence for imprecision as only one study with a small number of participants was available, the number of events was small and the result was consistent with benefit and harm.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Due to the limited number of included trials, there is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions about the effectiveness of cardiovascular prophylaxis in reducing mortality and cardiovascular events in people with AAA. Further good-quality randomised controlled trials that examine many types of prophylaxis with long-term follow-up are required before firm conclusions can be made.

Statins for primary prevention of venous thromboembolism

BACKGROUND

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common in clinical practice. The efficacy of statins in the primary prevention of VTE remains unproven. This is an update of the review first published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of statins in the primary prevention of VTE.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update the Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases (PVD) Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched February 2014) and CENTRAL (2014, Issue 1).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed statins in the primary prevention of VTE were considered. The outcomes we evaluated were the rates of VTE, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events, death and adverse events. Two authors (L Li, JH Tian) independently selected RCTs against the inclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third author (KH Yang).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data extraction was independently carried out by two authors (L Li, JH Tian). Disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third author (PZ Zhang). Two authors (L Li, JH Tian) independently assessed the risk of bias according to a standard quality checklist provided by the PVD Group.

MAIN RESULTS

For this update we included one RCT with 17,802 participants that assessed rosuvastatin compared with placebo for the prevention of VTE. The quality of the evidence was moderate because of imprecision, as the required sample size for the outcomes of this review was not achieved. Analysis showed that when compared with placebo rosuvastatin reduced the incidence of VTE (odds ratio (OR) 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.37 to 0.86) and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.79), the risk of any (fatal and non-fatal) myocardial infarction (MI) (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.69), and any (fatal and non-fatal) stroke (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.78). There was no difference in the incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.46), fatal MI (OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.53 to 4.22), fatal stroke (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.08 to 1.09) or death after VTE (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.24). The incidence of any serious adverse events was no different between the rosuvastatin and placebo groups (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.20).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence showed that rosuvastatin was associated with a reduced incidence of VTE, but the evidence was limited to a single RCT and any firm conclusions and suggestions could be not drawn. Randomised controlled trials of statins (including rosuvastatin) are needed to evaluate their efficacy in the prevention of VTE.

Pharmacological treatment of vascular risk factors for reducing mortality and cardiovascular events in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological prophylaxis has been proven to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with atherosclerotic occlusive arterial disease. However, the role of prophylaxis in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) remains unclear. Several studies have shown that despite successful repair, those with AAA have a poorer rate of survival than healthy controls. People with AAA have an increased prevalence of coronary heart disease and risk of cardiovascular events. Despite this association, little is known about the effectiveness of pharmacological prophylaxis in reducing cardiovascular risk in people with AAA.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the long-term effectiveness of antiplatelet, antihypertensive or lipid-lowering medication in reducing mortality and cardiovascular events in people with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group Trials Search Co-ordinator searched the Specialised Register (last searched April 2013) and CENTRAL (2013, Issue 3). Reference lists of relevant articles were also checked.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in which people with AAA were randomly allocated to one prophylactic treatment versus another, a different regimen of the same treatment, a placebo, or no treatment were eligible for inclusion in this review. Primary outcomes included all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Selection of the studies, quality assessment and data extraction were completed independently by two review authors. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion. Only one study was included in the review, therefore meta-analysis could not be performed.

MAIN RESULTS

One randomised controlled study was included in the review. A subgroup of 227 patients with AAA received either metoprolol (N = 111) or placebo (N = 116). There was no clear evidence that metoprolol reduced all-cause mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.02 to 1.41), cardiovascular death (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.76), AAA-related death (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.06 to 16.92) or increased nonfatal cardiovascular events (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.58 to 3.57) 30 days postoperatively. Furthermore, at six months postoperatively, estimated effects were compatible with benefit and harm for all-cause mortality (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.95), cardiovascular death (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.23 to 2.39) and nonfatal cardiovascular events (OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.59 to 3.35). Adverse drug effects were reported for the whole study population and were not available for the subgroup of participants with AAA. The study was deemed to be at a generally low risk of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Due to the limited number of trials, there is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions about the effectiveness of cardiovascular prophylaxis in reducing mortality and cardiovascular events in people with AAA. Further good-quality randomised controlled trials examining many types of prophylaxis with long-term follow-up are required before firm conclusions can be made.

Perioperative statin therapy for improving outcomes during and after noncardiac vascular surgery

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing vascular surgery are a high-risk population with widespread atherosclerosis, an adverse cardiovascular risk profile and often multiple co-morbidities. Postoperative cardiovascular complications, including myocardial infarct (MI), are common. Statins are the medical treatment of choice to reduce high cholesterol levels. Evidence is accumulating that patients taking statins at the time of surgery are protected against a range of perioperative complications, but the specific benefits for patients undergoing noncardiac vascular surgery are not clear.

OBJECTIVES

We examined whether short-term statin therapy, commenced before or on the day of noncardiac vascular surgery and continuing for at least 48 hours afterwards, improves patient outcomes including the risk of complications, pain, quality of life and length of hospital stay. We also examined whether the effect of statin therapy on these outcomes changes depending on the dose of statin received.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7), MEDLINE via Ovid SP (1966 to August 2012), EMBASE via Ovid SP (1966 to August 2012), CINAHL via EBSCO host (1966 to August 2012) and ISI Web of Science (1946 to July 2012) without any language restriction. We used a combination of free text search and controlled vocabulary search. The results were limited to randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs). We conducted forwards and backwards citation of key articles and searched two clinical trial Websites for ongoing trials (www.clinicaltrials.gov and http://www.controlled-trials.com).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs that had compared short-term statin therapy, either commenced de novo or with existing users randomly assigned to different dosages, in adult participants undergoing elective and emergency noncardiac arterial surgery, including both open and endovascular procedures. We defined short-term as commencing before or on the day of surgery and continuing for at least 48 hours afterwards.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data, including information on adverse events. We contacted study authors for additional information. We performed separate analyses for the comparisons of statin with placebo/no treatment and between different doses of statin. We presented results as pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) based on random-effects models (inverse variance method). We employed the Chi(2) test and calculated the I(2) statistic to investigate study heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified six eligible studies in total. The six Included studies were generally of high quality, but the largest eligible study was excluded because of concerns about its validity. Study populations were statin naive, which led to a considerable loss of eligible participants.Five RCTs compared statin use with placebo or standard care. We pooled results from three studies, with a total of 178 participants, for mortality and non-fatal event outcomes. In the statin group, 7/105 (6.7%) participants died within 30 days of surgery, as did 10/73 (13.7%) participants in the control group. Only one death in each group was from cardiovascular causes, with an incidence of 0.95% in statin participants and 1.4% in control participants, respectively. All deaths occurred in a single study population, and so effect estimates were derived from one study only. The risk ratio (RR) of all-cause mortality in statin users showed a non-significant decrease in risk (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.75). For cardiovascular death, the risk ratio was 1.05 (95% CI 0.07 to 16.20). Non-fatal MI within 30 days of surgery was reported in three studies and occurred in 4/105 (3.8%) participants in the statin group and 8/73 (11.0%) participants receiving placebo, for a non-significant decrease in risk (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.52). Several studies reported muscle enzyme levels as safety measures, but only three (with a total of 188 participants) reported explicitly on clinical muscle syndromes, with seven events reported and no significant difference found between statin users and controls (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.24 to 3.63). The only participant-reported outcome was nausea in one small study,with no significant difference in risk between groups.Two studies compared different doses of atorvastatin, with a total of 145 participants, but reported data were not sufficient to allow us to determine the effect of higher doses on any outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence was insufficient to allow review authors to conclude that statin use resulted in either a reduction or an increase in any of the outcomes examined. The existing body of evidence leaves questions about the benefits of perioperative use of statins for vascular surgery unanswered. Widespread use of statins in the target population means that it may now be difficult for researchers to undertake the large RCTs needed to demonstrate any effect on the incidence of postoperative cardiovascular events. However, participant-reported outcomes have been neglected and warrant further study.