Low-dose atorvastatin in severe chronic kidney disease patients: A randomized, controlled endpoint study

Association of albumin to non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio with mortality in peritoneal dialysis patients

OBJECTIVE

Malnutrition and inflammation are associated with mortality in peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients. Serum albumin and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) are independently associated with mortality in PD patients. Combining albumin and non-HDL-C with mortality may be more plausible in clinical practice.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 1954 Chinese PD patients from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2016. Kaplan-Meier curve was used to determine the relationship between albumin to non-HDL-C ratio and all-cause mortality. Cox regression analysis was applied to assess the independent predictive value while adjusting for confounding factors. Competitive risk analysis was used to examine the effects of other outcomes on all-cause mortality prognosis.

RESULTS

In the 33-month follow-up period, there were 538 all-cause deaths. Kaplan-Meier analysis presented significant differences in all-cause mortality. Multivariate Cox regression showed that the risk of all-cause mortality was lower in the moderate group (9.36-12.79) (HR, 0.731; 95% CI, 0.593-0.902, p = 0.004) and the highest group (>12.79) (HR, 0.705; 95% CI, 0.565-0.879, p = 0.002) compared to the lowest group (≤9.36). Competitive risk analysis revealed significant differences for all-cause mortality (p < 0.001), while there was no statistical significance for other competing events.

CONCLUSIONS

Low albumin to non-HDL-C ratio was associated with a high risk of all-cause mortality in PD patients. It may serve as a potential prognostic biomarker in PD patients.

HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for people with chronic kidney disease not requiring dialysis

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease is the most frequent cause of death in people with early stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD), and the absolute risk of cardiovascular events is similar to people with coronary artery disease. This is an update of a review first published in 2009 and updated in 2014, which included 50 studies (45,285 participants).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of statins compared with placebo, no treatment, standard care or another statin in adults with CKD not requiring dialysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 4 October 2023. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. An updated search will be undertaken every three months.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared the effects of statins with placebo, no treatment, standard care, or other statins, on death, cardiovascular events, kidney function, toxicity, and lipid levels in adults with CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 90 to 15 mL/min/1.73 m2) were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or more authors independently extracted data and assessed the study risk of bias. Treatment effects were expressed as mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous benefits and harms with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 63 studies (50,725 randomised participants); of these, 53 studies (42,752 participants) compared statins with placebo or no treatment. The median duration of follow-up was 12 months (range 2 to 64.8 months), the median dosage of statin was equivalent to 20 mg/day of simvastatin, and participants had a median eGFR of 55 mL/min/1.73 m2. Ten studies (7973 participants) compared two different statin regimens. We were able to meta-analyse 43 studies (41,273 participants). Most studies had limited reporting and hence exhibited unclear risk of bias in most domains. Compared with placebo or standard of care, statins prevent major cardiovascular events (14 studies, 36,156 participants: RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.79; I2 = 39%; high certainty evidence), death (13 studies, 34,978 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.96; I² = 53%; high certainty evidence), cardiovascular death (8 studies, 19,112 participants: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.87; I² = 0%; high certainty evidence) and myocardial infarction (10 studies, 9475 participants: RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.73; I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). There were too few events to determine if statins made a difference in hospitalisation due to heart failure. Statins probably make little or no difference to stroke (7 studies, 9115 participants: RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.08; I² = 39%; moderate certainty evidence) and kidney failure (3 studies, 6704 participants: RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.05; I² = 0%; moderate certainty evidence) in people with CKD not requiring dialysis. Potential harms from statins were limited by a lack of systematic reporting. Statins compared to placebo may have little or no effect on elevated liver enzymes (7 studies, 7991 participants: RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.50; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence), withdrawal due to adverse events (13 studies, 4219 participants: RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.60; I² = 37%; low certainty evidence), and cancer (2 studies, 5581 participants: RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.30; I² = 0%; low certainty evidence). However, few studies reported rhabdomyolysis or elevated creatinine kinase; hence, we are unable to determine the effect due to very low certainty evidence. Statins reduce the risk of death, major cardiovascular events, and myocardial infarction in people with CKD who did not have cardiovascular disease at baseline (primary prevention). There was insufficient data to determine the benefits and harms of the type of statin therapy.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Statins reduce death and major cardiovascular events by about 20% and probably make no difference to stroke or kidney failure in people with CKD not requiring dialysis. However, due to limited reporting, the effect of statins on elevated creatinine kinase or rhabdomyolysis is unclear. Statins have an important role in the primary prevention of cardiovascular events and death in people who have CKD and do not require dialysis. Editorial note: This is a living systematic review. We will search for new evidence every three months and update the review when we identify relevant new evidence. Please refer to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for the current status of this review.

The association of statin therapy and cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Statins are routinely prescribed to lower cholesterol and have been demonstrated to have significant benefits in atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. However, whether statin therapy has effects on cancer risk remains controversial. In this study, we investigated the influence of statin therapy on cancer incidence and mortality by conducting a comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

METHODS

Systematic searches by Cochrane, Embase, Medline, and PubMed were performed to locate data from eligible randomized controlled trials related to statin therapy and oncology. Our main endpoints were cancer incidence and mortality. Fixed-effects models were used in this study.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis comprised thirty-five randomized controlled studies. Twenty-eight included studies reported cancer incidence, and eighteen reported cancer mortality. The pooled results indicated no reduction in cancer incidence with statins compared to placebo [OR = 0.99, 95% CI (0.95, 1.03)]. In addition, statins did not decrease cancer mortality [OR = 0.99, 95% CI (0.91, 1.07)]. This study also performed a number of subgroup analyses, which showed no effect of statins on cancer subtypes such as genitourinary and breast cancer. Neither the type of statin nor long-term treatment with statins had an effect on cancer incidence and mortality.

CONCLUSION

Through comprehensive analysis, we found that statin therapy does not reduce cancer incidence or mortality while protecting the cardiovascular system.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Prospero CRD42022377871.

Improvement of clinical outcomes in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis using hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It is unclear whether hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) therapy decreases the risk of mortality and cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD).

METHODS

We performed a literature search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and other databases for research publications up to June 2022. The outcomes of interest were fatal and nonfatal CVDs, all-cause mortality, and changes in the biochemical profiles. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled and synthesized using a random-effects model. The certainty of the evidence was determined using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.

RESULTS

Nine studies, including 2,933 patients undergoing PD, were included. Among them, three studies, including 2,099 patients, reported all-cause mortality, and three, including 1,571 patients, reported CVDs. In these patients, pooling results of two observational studies (very low-certainty evidence) showed that statin therapy significantly reduced CVDs (HR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.54-0.84; p = 0.0004). Moreover, statin therapy was associated with significantly reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, and C-reactive protein levels (very low certainty of evidence). However, the effects of statin therapy on triglyceride, high-density lipoprotein, and albumin levels were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Although statin therapy was associated with significantly reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, and C-reactive protein levels, the probable beneficial effect of statins on CVD risk in patients undergoing PD could not be concluded firmly. Additional high-quality studies are required to assess the potential beneficial effects of statin therapy in PD patients.

Antidyslipidemia Pharmacotherapy in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The benefits and safety of antidyslipidemia pharmacotherapy in patients with chronic kidney disease were not well defined so the latest evidence was summarized by this work.

METHODS

This systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) included searches of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to 28 February 2022, for randomized controlled trials of any antilipidaemic medications administered to adults with chronic kidney disease [CKD: defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≤ 60 mL/min/1.73 m² not undergoing transplantation], using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool to assess the certainty of the evidence.

RESULTS

55 trials and 30 works of them were included in our systematic review and NMA, respectively. In comparisons with no antidyslipidemia therapy or placebo, proprotein convertase subtilisin/Kexin type 9 inhibitors plus statin (PS) was the most effective drug regimen for reducing all-cause mortality (OR 0.62, 95% CI [0.40, 0.93]; GRADE: moderate), followed by moderate-high intensity statin (HS, OR 0.76, 95% CI [0.60, 0.93]; I² = 66.9%; GRADE: moderate). PS, HS, low-moderate statin (LS), ezetimibe plus statin (ES), and fibrates (F) significantly decreased the composite cardiovascular events. The subgroup analysis revealed the null effect of statins on death (OR 0.92, 95% CI [0.81, 1.04]) and composite cardiovascular events (OR 0.94, 95% CI [0.82, 1.07]) in dialysis patients.

CONCLUSION

In nondialysis CKD patients, statin-based therapies could significantly and safely reduce all-cause death and major composite cardiovascular events despite the presence of arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease and LDL-c levels. Aggressive medication regimens, PS and HS, appeared to be more effective, especially in patients with established CAD.

Effect of statins on cardiovascular complications in chronic kidney disease patients: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The rates of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity are increased in advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). Mild to moderate CKD is associated with an increase in cardiovascular events. This study aims to investigate the effects of statins on patient mortality and cardiac events.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Studies on statins (atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin, pravastatin, simvastatin, and simvastatin + ezetimibe) in Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded databases from 1970 to February 2019 were analyzed. Inclusion criteria were randomized control trials and adult patients (>18 years old). Reviews, observational studies, and clinical trials that did not clearly define outcomes or that did not have thrombosis as an outcome were excluded. We performed direct and indirect network meta-analysis using Bayesian models and ranked different statins using generation mixed treatment comparison (GeMTC) and Stata version 13. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) of network meta-analysis approach specified 4 levels of certainty for a given result: high, moderate, low, and very low. The outcomes were cardiac events, cardiac mortality, and all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies (45,863 patients) were included. Compared with placebos, pravastatin 40 mg group showed a significantly lower patient mortality (odds ratio 0.66 [95% credible interval, 0.46-0.91]).Atorvastatin 80 mg, fluvastatin 40 mg, lovastatin 20 mg, pravastatin 40 mg, and simvastatin 40 mg showed significant results in reducing cardiac events.In rank probability, pravastatin showed the best effect at all-cause mortality rate. Lovastatin, fluvastatin, and pravastatin showed good effects in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd ranks in cardiac events.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS

Pravastatin 40 mg demonstrated the best effect on all-cause mortality, and was observed to be effective with high ranking in cardiac events. We anticipate that the data of this study will assist physicians in making informed decisions when selecting statins, such as pravastatin, as a treatment option for CKD patients.

Cholesterol-Lowering Treatment in Chronic Kidney Disease: Multistage Pairwise and Network Meta-Analyses

Pairwise and network meta-analyses on the relationship between the efficacy of the use of statins with or without ezetimibe and reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLc) and C-reactive protein (CRP) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are presented. In the pairwise meta-analysis, statins with or without ezetimibe were shown to be efficacious in reducing major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with CKD and an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of less than 60 ml/min/1.73 m², in the context of both primary prevention [odds ratio (OR)/95% confidence interval (95% CI)/I²/number of studies (n): 0.50/0.40–0.64/0%/6] and primary/secondary prevention (0.66/0.57–0.76/57%/18). However, in the Bayesian network meta-analysis, compared to the placebo, only atorvastatin 80 mg daily and atorvastatin and rosuvastatin at doses equivalent to simvastatin 20 mg daily reduced the odds of MACEs in this patient population. The network meta-analysis for LDLc and CRP treatment objectives also showed that, regardless of eGFR and excluding dialysis patients, the number of MACEs decreased in patients with CKD, with reductions in both LDLc and CRP of less than 50% (surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA)/heterogeneity (vague)/n: 0.77/0.14/3). The evaluation of the benefits of drugs may lead to individualized therapy for CKD patients: Cholesterol-lowering treatment for CKD patients with high levels of both LDLc and CRP is suggested.

Effectiveness of contrast-associated acute kidney injury prevention methods; a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Different methods to prevent contrast-associated acute kidney injury (CA-AKI) have been proposed in recent years. We performed a mixed treatment comparison to evaluate and rank suggested interventions.

METHODS

A comprehensive Systematic review and a Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials was completed. Results were tabulated and graphically represented using a network diagram; forest plots and league tables were shown to rank treatments by the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). A stacked bar chart rankogram was generated. We performed main analysis with 200 RCTs and three analyses according to contrast media and high or normal baseline renal profile that includes 173, 112 & 60 RCTs respectively.

RESULTS

We have included 200 trials with 42,273 patients and 44 interventions. The primary outcome was CI-AKI, defined as ≥25% relative increase or ≥ 0.5 mg/dl increase from baseline creatinine one to 5 days post contrast exposure. The top ranked interventions through different analyses were Allopurinol, Prostaglandin E1 (PGE1) & Oxygen (0.9647, 0.7809 & 0.7527 in the main analysis). Comparatively, reference treatment intravenous hydration was ranked lower but better than Placebo (0.3124 VS 0.2694 in the main analysis).

CONCLUSION

Multiple CA-AKI preventive interventions have been tested in RCTs. This network evaluates data for all the explored options. The results suggest that some options (particularly allopurinol, PGE1 & Oxygen) deserve further evaluation in a larger well-designed RCTs.

Medication adherence in randomized controlled trials evaluating cardiovascular or mortality outcomes in dialysis patients: A systematic review

Background

Medication non-adherence is common among renal dialysis patients. High degrees of non-adherence in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) can lead to failure to detect a true treatment effect. Cardio-protective pharmacological interventions have shown no consistent benefit in RCTs involving dialysis patients. Whether non-adherence contributes to this lack of efficacy is unknown. We aimed to investigate how medication adherence and drug discontinuation were assessed, reported and addressed in RCTs, evaluating cardiovascular or mortality outcomes in dialysis patients.

Methods

Electronic database searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE & Cochrane CENTRAL for RCTs published between 2005–2015, evaluating self-administered medications, in adult dialysis patients, which reported clinical cardiovascular or mortality endpoints, as primary or secondary outcomes. Study characteristics, outcomes, methods of measuring and reporting adherence, and data on study drug discontinuation were analyzed.

Results

Of the 642 RCTs in dialysis patients, 22 trials (12 placebo controlled), which included 19,322 patients, were eligible. The trialed pharmacological interventions included anti-hypertensives, phosphate binders, lipid-lowering therapy, cardio-vascular medications, homocysteine lowering therapy, fish oil and calcimimetics. Medication adherence was reported in five trials with a mean of 81% (range: 65–92%) in the intervention arm and 84.5% (range: 82–87%) in the control arm. All the trials that reported adherence yielded negative study outcomes for the intervention. Study-drug discontinuation was reported in 21 trials (mean 33.2%; 95% CI, 22.0 to 44.5, in intervention and 28.8%; 95% CI, 16.8 to 40.8, in control). Trials with more than 20% study drug discontinuation, more often yielded negative study outcomes (p = 0.018). Non-adherence was included as a contributor to drug discontinuation in some studies, but the causes of discontinuation were not reported consistently between studies, and non-adherence was listed under different categories, thereby potentiating the misclassification of adherence.

Conclusions

Reporting of medication adherence and study-drug discontinuation in RCTs investigating cardiovascular or mortality endpoints in dialysis patients are inconsistent, making it difficult to compare studies and evaluate their impact on outcomes. Recommendations for consistent reporting of non-adherence and causes of drug discontinuation in RCTs will therefore help to assess their impact on clinical outcomes.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12882-017-0449-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for people with chronic kidney disease not requiring dialysis

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the most frequent cause of death in people with early stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD), for whom the absolute risk of cardiovascular events is similar to people who have existing coronary artery disease. This is an update of a review published in 2009, and includes evidence from 27 new studies (25,068 participants) in addition to the 26 studies (20,324 participants) assessed previously; and excludes three previously included studies (107 participants). This updated review includes 50 studies (45,285 participants); of these 38 (37,274 participants) were meta-analysed.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits (such as reductions in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, major cardiovascular events, MI and stroke; and slow progression of CKD to end-stage kidney disease (ESKD)) and harms (muscle and liver dysfunction, withdrawal, and cancer) of statins compared with placebo, no treatment, standard care or another statin in adults with CKD who were not on dialysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register to 5 June 2012 through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared the effects of statins with placebo, no treatment, standard care, or other statins, on mortality, cardiovascular events, kidney function, toxicity, and lipid levels in adults with CKD not on dialysis were the focus of our literature searches.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or more authors independently extracted data and assessed study risk of bias. Treatment effects were expressed as mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes (lipids, creatinine clearance and proteinuria) and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (major cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), fatal or non-fatal stroke, ESKD, elevated liver enzymes, rhabdomyolysis, cancer and withdrawal rates) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 50 studies (45,285 participants): 47 studies (39,820 participants) compared statins with placebo or no treatment and three studies (5547 participants) compared two different statin regimens in adults with CKD who were not yet on dialysis. We were able to meta-analyse 38 studies (37,274 participants).The risk of bias in the included studies was high. Seven studies comparing statins with placebo or no treatment had lower risk of bias overall; and were conducted according to published protocols, outcomes were adjudicated by a committee, specified outcomes were reported, and analyses were conducted using intention-to-treat methods. In placebo or no treatment controlled studies, adverse events were reported in 32 studies (68%) and systematically evaluated in 16 studies (34%).Compared with placebo, statin therapy consistently prevented major cardiovascular events (13 studies, 36,033 participants; RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.79), all-cause mortality (10 studies, 28,276 participants; RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.91), cardiovascular death (7 studies, 19,059 participants; RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.87) and MI (8 studies, 9018 participants; RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.72). Statins had uncertain effects on stroke (5 studies, 8658 participants; RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.12).Potential harms from statin therapy were limited by lack of systematic reporting and were uncertain in analyses that had few events: elevated creatine kinase (7 studies, 4514 participants; RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.20 to 3.48), liver function abnormalities (7 studies, RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.50), withdrawal due to adverse events (13 studies, 4219 participants; RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.60), and cancer (2 studies, 5581 participants; RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.82 to 130).Statins had uncertain effects on progression of CKD. Data for relative effects of intensive cholesterol lowering in people with early stages of kidney disease were sparse. Statins clearly reduced risks of death, major cardiovascular events, and MI in people with CKD who did not have CVD at baseline (primary prevention).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Statins consistently lower death and major cardiovascular events by 20% in people with CKD not requiring dialysis. Statin-related effects on stroke and kidney function were found to be uncertain and adverse effects of treatment are incompletely understood. Statins have an important role in primary prevention of cardiovascular events and mortality in people who have CKD.

Statin use is not associated with reduced risk of skin cancer: a meta-analysis

Background:

There is contradictory evidence about the association between statin and skin cancer.

Methods:

Literature search in PubMed and Web of Science was undertaken up to June 2013. Pooled relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

Result:

A total of 21 articles with 29 studies were identified. No association was found between statin and skin cancer among neither melanoma (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85–1.04) nor non-melanoma skin cancer (RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.90–1.19).

Conclusion:

Our meta-analysis does not support a potential role of statin use in the prevention of skin cancer.

HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

People with advanced kidney disease treated with dialysis experience mortality rates from cardiovascular disease that are substantially higher than for the general population. Studies that have assessed the benefits of statins (HMG CoA reductase inhibitors) report conflicting conclusions for people on dialysis and existing meta-analyses have not had sufficient power to determine whether the effects of statins vary with severity of kidney disease. Recently, additional data for the effects of statins in dialysis patients have become available. This is an update of a review first published in 2004 and last updated in 2009.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of statin use in adults who require dialysis (haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register to 29 February 2012 through contact with the Trials' Search Co-ordinator using search terms relevant to this review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that compared the effects of statins with placebo, no treatment, standard care or other statins on mortality, cardiovascular events and treatment-related toxicity in adults treated with dialysis were sought for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or more authors independently extracted data and assessed study risk of bias. Treatment effects were summarised using a random-effects model and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore sources of heterogeneity. Treatment effects were expressed as mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes together with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

The risk of bias was high in many of the included studies. Random sequence generation and allocation concealment was reported in three (12%) and four studies (16%), respectively. Participants and personnel were blinded in 13 studies (52%), and outcome assessors were blinded in five studies (20%). Complete outcome reporting occurred in nine studies (36%). Adverse events were only reported in nine studies (36%); 11 studies (44%) reported industry funding.We included 25 studies (8289 participants) in this latest update; 23 studies (24 comparisons, 8166 participants) compared statins with placebo or no treatment, and two studies (123 participants) compared statins directly with one or more other statins. Statins had little or no effect on major cardiovascular events (4 studies, 7084 participants: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.03), all-cause mortality (13 studies, 4705 participants: RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.02), cardiovascular mortality (13 studies, 4627 participants: RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.06) and myocardial infarction (3 studies, 4047 participants: RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.07); and uncertain effects on stroke (2 studies, 4018 participants: RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.72).Risks of adverse events from statin therapy were uncertain; these included effects on elevated creatine kinase (5 studies, 3067 participants: RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.83) or liver function enzymes (4 studies, 3044 participants; RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.25), withdrawal due to adverse events (9 studies, 1832 participants: RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.25) or cancer (2 studies, 4012 participants: RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.11). Statins reduced total serum cholesterol (14 studies, 1803 participants; MD -44.86 mg/dL, 95% CI -55.19 to -34.53) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (12 studies, 1747 participants: MD -39.99 mg/dL, 95% CI -52.46 to -27.52) levels. Data comparing statin therapy directly with another statin were sparse.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Statins have little or no beneficial effects on mortality or cardiovascular events and uncertain adverse effects in adults treated with dialysis despite clinically relevant reductions in serum cholesterol levels.

Effect of statin therapy on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in patients with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

The effects of statin therapy in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) remain uncertain. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effects of statin on major clinical outcomes.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for trials published between 1970 and November 2011. We included prospective, randomized, controlled trials assessing the effects of statins on cardiovascular outcomes in people with kidney disease. Summary estimates of relative risk (RR) reductions were calculated with a random effects model. Thirty-one trials that include at least one event were identified, providing data for 48 429 patients with CKD, including 6690 major cardiovascular events and 6653 deaths. Statin therapy produced a 23% RR reduction (16-30) for major cardiovascular events (P<0.001), an 18% RR reduction (8-27) for coronary events, and 9% (1-16) reduction in cardiovascular or all-cause deaths, but had no significantly effect on stroke (21%, -12 to 44) or no clear effect on kidney failure events (5%, -1 to 10). Adverse events were not significantly increased by statins, including hepatic (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.92-1.39) or muscular disorders (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.95-1.09). Subgroup analysis demonstrated the relative effects of statin therapy in CKD were significantly reduced in people with advanced CKD (P < 0.001) but that the absolute risk reductions were comparable.

CONCLUSION

Statin therapy reduces the risk of major cardiovascular events in patients with chronic kidney disease including those receiving dialysis.

Systematic review and meta-analysis on the association between outpatient statins use and infectious disease-related mortality

BACKGROUND

To update and refine systematic literature review on the association between outpatient statins use and mortality in patients with infectious disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched articles published before September 31, 2012, on the association between statins and infectious disease-related mortality through electronic databases. Eligible articles were analyzed in Review Manager 5.1. We conducted stratification analysis by study design, infection types, clinical outcomes and study locations.

RESULTS

The pooled odds ratio (OR) for death (statins use vs. no use) across the 41 included studies was 0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.64, 0.78). The corresponding pooled ORs were 0.58 (0.38, 0.90), 0.66 (0.57, 0.75), 0.71 (0.57, 0.89) and 0.83 (0.67, 1.04) for the case-control study, retrospective cohort studies, prospective cohort studies and RCTs; 0.40 (0.20, 0.78), 0.61 (0.41, 0.90), 0.69 (0.62, 0.78) and 0.86 (0.68, 1.09) for bacteremia, sepsis, pneumonia and other infections; 0.62 (0.534, 0.72), 0.68 (0.53, 0.89), 0.71 (0.61, 0.83) and 0.86 (0.70, 1.07) for 30-day, 90-day, in-hospital and long-term (>1 year) mortality, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Outpatient statins use is associated with a lower risk of death in patients with infectious disease in observational studies, but in a less extent in clinical trials. This association also varies considerably by infection types and clinical outcomes.

Benefits and harms of statin therapy for persons with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Statins have uncertain benefits in persons with chronic kidney disease (CKD) because individual trials may have insufficient power to determine whether treatment effects differ with severity of CKD.

PURPOSE

To summarize the benefits and harms of statin therapy for adults with CKD and examine whether effects of statins vary by stage of kidney disease.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane and EMBASE databases (inception to February 2012).

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized trials comparing the effects of statins with placebo, no treatment, or another statin on mortality and cardiovascular outcomes.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Eighty trials comprising 51099 participants compared statin with placebo or no treatment. Treatment effects varied with stage of CKD. Moderate- to high-quality evidence indicated that statins reduced all-cause mortality (relative risk [RR], 0.81 [95% CI, 0.74 to 0.88]), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.78 [CI, 0.68 to 0.89]), and cardiovascular events (RR, 0.76 [CI, 0.73 to 0.80]) in persons not receiving dialysis. Moderate- to high-quality evidence indicated that statins had little or no effect on all-cause mortality (RR, 0.96 [CI, 0.88 to 1.04]), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.94 [CI, 0.82 to 1.07]), or cardiovascular events (RR, 0.95 [CI, 0.87 to 1.03]) in persons receiving dialysis. Effects of statins in kidney transplant recipients were uncertain. Statins had little or no effect on cancer, myalgia, liver function, or withdrawal from treatment, although adverse events were evaluated systematically in fewer than half of the trials.

LIMITATION

There was a reliance on post hoc subgroup data for earlier stages of CKD.

CONCLUSION

Statins decrease mortality and cardiovascular events in persons with early stages of CKD, have little or no effect in persons receiving dialysis, and have uncertain effects in kidney transplant recipients.

Prospective analysis of association between use of statins and melanoma risk in the Women's Health Initiative

BACKGROUND

Melanoma is the most lethal form of skin cancer, with an estimated 68,130 new cases and 8700 deaths in the United States in 2010. The increasing incidence and high death rate associated with metastatic disease support the need to focus on prevention. The authors used data from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) to assess whether 3-hydroxy-3 methylglutaryl coenzyme A inhibitors (statins) are associated with a decreased risk of melanoma.

METHODS

The study population consisted of 119,726 postmenopausal white women, in which 1099 cases of malignant melanoma were identified over an average (± standard deviation) of 11.6 ± 3.2 years. All diagnoses were confirmed by medical record review and pathology reports. Information on statin use was collected at baseline and during follow-up. Self-administered and interview-administered questionnaires were used to collect information on other risk factors. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Analyses investigated the association of any statin use, type, potency, lipophilic status, and duration of use with melanoma.

RESULTS

Statins were used by 8824 women (7.4%) at baseline. The annualized rate of melanoma was 0.09% among statin users and 0.09% among nonusers The multivariable adjusted HR for statin users compared with nonusers was 1.14 (95% CI, 0.91-1.43). There were no significant differences in risk based on statin type, potency, category, duration, or in time-dependent models.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant association between statin use and melanoma risk among postmenopausal women in the WHI.

Dyslipidemia in children with CKD: should we treat with statins?

Dyslipidemia has been shown to be a risk factor for increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in adult patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) stages 2-4. In patients on dialysis, a paradoxical correlation has been found between low cholesterol values and increased mortality rates. No data exist in children. Treatment with statins has been convincingly shown to both reduce blood lipid levels and mortality rates from cardiovascular disease in adult patients in CKD stages 2-4. There is no strong literature support for treating patients on dialysis or after having had a transplant. Data on benefits of statin therapy do not exist in children with CKD. There are many differences between adult and paediatric kidney patients, and I caution on extrapolating the findings in adult patients to children. Studies are thus needed to evaluate the benefits and potential problems of statin treatment in children with CKD.

Adverse events associated with individual statin treatments for cardiovascular disease: an indirect comparison meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Statins are the most widely prescribed drug available. Due to this reason, it is important to understand the risks involved with the drug class and individual statins.

AIM

We conducted a meta-analysis and employed indirect comparisons to identify differing risk effects across statins.

DESIGN

We included any randomized clinical trial (RCT) of atorvastatin, fluvastatin, lovastatin, pitavastatin, pravastatin, rosuvastatin and simvastatin used for cardiovascular disease event prevention. The main outcome was adverse events [all-cause mortality, cancers, rhabdomylosis, diabetes, aspartate and alanine aminotransferase (AST/ALT), and creatinine kinase (CK) increases beyond the upper limit of normal]. In order to evaluate the relative effects of each drug on adverse events, we calculated adjusted indirect comparisons of the adverse-event outcomes.

RESULTS

Seventy-two trials involving 159,458 patients met our inclusion criteria. Overall, statin treatments significantly increased the rate of diabetes when compared to controls (OR: 1.09; 95% CI: 1.02-1.16) and elevated AST (OR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.04-1.66) and ALT (OR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.11-1.48) levels when compared to controls. Using indirect comparisons, we also found that atorvastatin significantly elevated AST levels compared to pravastatin (OR: 2.21; 95% CI: 1.13-4.29) and simvastatin significantly increased CK levels when compared to rosuvastatin (OR: 4.39; 95% CI: 1.01-19.07). Higher dose studies had increased risk of AST elevations.

DISCUSSION

Although statins are generally well tolerated, there are risks associated with almost all drugs. With few exceptions, statins appear to exert a similar risk across individual drugs.

Statins and prevention of infections: systematic review and meta-analysis of data from large randomised placebo controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the potential of statins to lower the risk of infections as published in observational studies is causal.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomised placebo controlled trials of statins (up to 10 March 2011) enrolling a minimum of 100 participants, with follow-up for at least one year.

DATA EXTRACTION

Infection or infection related death.

RESULTS

The first study selection yielded 632 trials. After screening of the corresponding abstracts and full text papers, 11 trials totalling 30 947 participants were included. 4655 of the participants (2368 assigned to statins and 2287 assigned to placebo) reported an infection during treatment. Meta-analysis showed no effect of statins on the risk of infections (relative risk 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.96 to 1.05) or on infection related deaths (0.97, 0.83 to 1.13).

CONCLUSION

These findings do not support the hypothesis that statins reduce the risk of infections. Absence of any evidence for a beneficial effect in large placebo controlled trials reduces the likelihood of a causal effect as reported in observational studies.

Efficacy and safety of statin treatment for cardiovascular disease: a network meta-analysis of 170,255 patients from 76 randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Statins represent the largest selling class of cardiovascular drug in the world. Previous randomized trials (RCTs) have demonstrated important clinical benefits with statin therapy.

AIM

We combined evidence from all RCTs comparing a statin with placebo or usual care among patients with and without prior coronary heart disease (CHD) to determine clinical outcomes.

DESIGN

We searched independently, in duplicate, 12 electronic databases (from inception to August 2010), including full text journal content databases, to identify all statin versus inert control RCTs. We included RCTs of any statin versus any non-drug control in any populations. We abstracted data in duplicate on reported major clinical events and adverse events. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression. We performed a mixed treatment comparison using Bayesian methods.

RESULTS

We included a total of 76 RCTs involving 170,255 participants. There were a total of 14,878 deaths. Statin therapy reduced all-cause mortality, Relative Risk (RR) 0.90 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86-0.94, P ≤ 0.0001, I(2)=17%]; cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74-0.87, P<0.0001, I(2)=27%); fatal myocardial infarction (MI) (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.75-0.91, P<0.0001, I(2)=21%); non-fatal MI (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.67-0.81, P ≤ 0.001, I(2)=45%); revascularization (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.70-0.81, P ≤ 0.0001); and a composite of fatal and non-fatal strokes (0.86, 95% CI 0.78-0.95, P=0.004, I(2)=41%). Adverse events were generally mild, but 17 RCTs reported on increased risk of development of incident diabetes [Odds Ratio (OR) 1.09; 95% CI 1.02-1.17, P=0.001, I(2)=11%]. Studies did not yield important differences across populations. We did not find any differing treatment effects between statins.

DISCUSSION

Statin therapies offer clear benefits across broad populations. As generic formulations become more available efforts to expand access should be a priority.

Can statin therapy reduce the risk of melanoma? A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

A growing body of literature suggests that statins may have a chemopreventive potential against melanoma through pleiotropic anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, and antiangiogenesis mechanisms. Our aim was to examine this association through a detailed meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A comprehensive search for trials published up to June 2009 was performed, reviews of each study were conducted and data were abstracted. Prior to meta-analysis, the studies were evaluated for publication bias and heterogeneity. Pooled relative risk estimates (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the fixed- and the random-effects models. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were also conducted. Sixteen RCTs of statins for cardiovascular outcomes, involving 62,568 individuals with a mean age of 60 years and an average follow-up of nearly 4.7 years, contributed to the analysis. We found no evidence of publication bias (P = 0.47) or heterogeneity among the studies (P = 0.25). Statin use did not significantly affect the risk of developing melanoma assuming either a fixed- (RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.67-1.26), or a random-effects model (RR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.62-1.36). This neutral effect was further supported by the results of subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Our findings do not support a protective effect of statins against melanoma.

HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease accounts for more than half the number of deaths among dialysis patients. The role of HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) in the treatment of dyslipidaemia in dialysis patients is unclear and their safety has not been established.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of statins in peritoneal dialysis (PD) and haemodialysis patients (HD).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials (CENTRAL, in The Cochrane Library), the Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register and handsearched reference lists of textbooks, articles and scientific proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing statins with placebo, no treatment or other hypolipidaemic agents in dialysis patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model after testing for heterogeneity. The results were expressed as mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen studies (2086 patients) compared statins versus placebo or other lipid lowering agents. Compared to placebo, statins did not decrease all-cause mortality (10 studies, 1884 patients; RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.06) or cardiovascular mortality (9 studies, 1839 patients: RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.40). There was a lower incidence of nonfatal cardiovascular events with statins compared to placebo in haemodialysis patients (1 study, 1255 patients; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.99). Compared with placebo, statin use was associated with a significantly lower end of treatment average total cholesterol (14 studies, 1823 patients; MD -42.61 mg/dL, 95% CI -53.38 to -31.84), LDL cholesterol (13 studies, 1801 patients; MD -43.06 mg/dL, 95% CI -53.78 to -32.35) and triglycerides (14 studies, 1823 patients: MD -24.01 mg/dL, 95% CI -47.29 to -0.72). There was similar occurrence of rhabdomyolysis and elevated liver function tests with statins in comparison to placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Statins decreased cholesterol levels in dialysis patients similar to that of the general population. With the exception of one study, studies were of short duration and therefore the efficacy of statins in decreasing the mortality rate is still unclear. Statins appear to be safe in this high-risk population. Ongoing studies should provide more insight about the efficacy of statins in reducing mortality rates in dialysis patients.

HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for dialysis patients

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease accounts for more than half the number of deaths among dialysis patients. The role of HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) in the treatment of dyslipidaemia in dialysis patients is unclear and their safety has not been established.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of statins in peritoneal dialysis (PD) and haemodialysis patients (HD).

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials (CENTRAL, in The Cochrane Library), the Cochrane Renal Group's specialised register and handsearched reference lists of textbooks, articles and scientific proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing statins with placebo, no treatment or other hypolipidaemic agents in dialysis patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using the random effects model after testing for heterogeneity. The results were expressed as mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Fourteen studies (2086 patients) compared statins versus placebo or other lipid lowering agents. Compared to placebo, statins did not decrease all-cause mortality (10 studies, 1884 patients; RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.06) or cardiovascular mortality (9 studies, 1839 patients: RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.40). There was a lower incidence of nonfatal cardiovascular events with statins compared to placebo in haemodialysis patients (1 study, 1255 patients; RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.99). Compared with placebo, statin use was associated with a significantly lower end of treatment average total cholesterol (14 studies, 1823 patients; MD -42.61 mg/dL, 95% CI -53.38 to -31.84), LDL cholesterol (13 studies, 1801 patients; MD -43.06 mg/dL, 95% CI -53.78 to -32.35) and triglycerides (14 studies, 1823 patients: MD -24.01 mg/dL, 95% CI -47.29 to -0.72). There was similar occurrence of rhabdomyolysis and elevated liver function tests with statins in comparison to placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Statins decreased cholesterol levels in dialysis patients similar to that of the general population. With the exception of one study, studies were of short duration and therefore the efficacy of statins in decreasing the mortality rate is still unclear. Statins appear to be safe in this high-risk population. Ongoing studies should provide more insight about the efficacy of statins in reducing mortality rates in dialysis patients.

HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) for people with chronic kidney disease not requiring dialysis

BACKGROUND

Dyslipidaemia occurs frequently in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients and contributes both to cardiovascular disease and worsening renal function. Statins are widely used in non-dialysis dependent CKD patients (pre-dialysis) even though evidence favouring their use is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of statins in CKD patients who were not receiving renal replacement therapy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL (in The Cochrane Library), and hand-searched reference lists of textbooks, articles and scientific proceedings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing statins with placebo, no treatment or other statins in adult pre-dialysis CKD patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed study quality and extracted data. Results were expressed as mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes (lipids, creatinine clearance and proteinuria) and risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes (all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events, elevated liver enzymes, rhabdomyolysis and withdrawal rates) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty six studies (25,017 participants) comparing statins with placebo were identified. Total cholesterol decreased significantly with statins (18 studies, 1677 patients: MD -41.48 mg/dL, 95% CI -49.97 to -33.99). Similarly, LDL cholesterol decreased significantly with statins (16 studies, 1605 patients: MD -42.38 mg/dL, 95% CI -50.71 to -34.05). Statins decreased both the risk of all-cause (21 RCTs, 18,781 patients, RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.74, 0.89) and cardiovascular deaths (20 studies, 18,746 patients: RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.90). Statins decreased 24-hour urinary protein excretion (6 studies, 311 patients: MD -0.73 g/24 h, 95% CI -0.95 to -0.52), but there was no significant improvement in creatinine clearance - a surrogate marker of renal function (11 studies, 548 patients: MD 1.48 mL/min, 95% CI -2.32 to 5.28).The incidence of rhabdomyolysis, elevated liver enzymes and withdrawal rates due to adverse events (well known complications of statins use), were not significantly different between patients receiving statins and placebo.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Statins significantly reduced the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in CKD patients who are not receiving renal replacement therapy. They do not impact on the decline in renal function as measured by creatinine clearance, but may reduce protein excretion in urine. Statins appear to be safe in this population. Guidelines recommendations on hyperlipidaemia management in CKD patients could therefore be followed targeting higher proportions of patients receiving a statin, with appropriate monitoring of adverse events.

Cardiovascular conditions in hemodialysis patients may be worsened by extensive interdialytic weight gain

The risk of death is increased for hemodialysis (HD) patients compared with age-matched healthy subjects, the main reason for this being cardiovascular conditions. This prospective study investigated whether the burden of interdialytic weight gain (IDWG) was of importance for cardiovascular end points and survival. A total of 97 HD patients were studied. The end points included death (reasons given), acute myocardial infarction, or coronary vascular intervention. The extent of ultrafiltration was measured at predefined follow-up points. The IDWG was calculated as ultrafiltration/body weight given in weight%. The burden of IDWG was analyzed. End points occurred in 77 (79%) of the patients during the 5-year study period. The extent of IDWG was higher in those with end points due to cardiovascular reasons (3.77 weight% vs. 3.19 P<0.001), cardiac reasons (P<0.001), congestive heart failure (P<0.01), aortic aneurysm, and intracerebral bleeding (P<0.024). To reduce the risk for cardiovascular events, it is important to avoid too extensive IDWG in HD patients.

Minimized weight gain between hemodialysis contributes to a reduced risk of death

The risk of death is higher in dialysis patients compared to age matched healthy subjects, the main reason being cardiovascular. This prospective study investigated if the extent of ultrafiltration was of importance for the outcome.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

88 hemodialysis patients were included and followed prospectively. The outcome was registered in regard to death, acute myocardial infarction or coronary vascular intervention. The extent of ultrafiltration needed at dialysis was calculated as a mean during the observation period as were other variables. The mean extent of ultrafiltration was compared for patients who had survived without end-points (group 1, n=53) versus those who reached any end-point during the period (group 2, n=35).

RESULTS

In total, 40% of the patients reached end-point during the observation period. There was no difference at baseline between the groups in regard to age, prevalence of diabetes mellitus or history of previous cardiovascular disease, KT/V, residual renal function ultrafiltration need, C-reactive protein, s-albumin, cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, appetite or wellbeing, while triglyceride was lower in group 2 (p=0.035). The observation period for group 1 was at a mean 24.7 months (SD13.1) and for those in group 2 at a mean 13.8 (+/-11.7 months, p<0.001). Patients representing group 1 at 24 and 30 months had less need of ultrafiltration than those in group 2. Thus, the need of ultrafiltration was about 27% lower at 24 months (for 29 persons in group 1: 3.63+/-1.93 weight% versus 4.97+/-1.70 weight% for 9 patients from group 2, p=0.046) and 46% at 30 months (for 18 from group 1: 3.48+/-1.95 versus 6.45+/-1.55 for 3 from group 2, p=0.030). C-reactive protein did not differ significantly between the groups during the period.

CONCLUSION

After a prolonged period of 24 months the extent of ultrafiltration need seems to be important for the outcome of the patients. Thereby those with higher need of ultrafiltration had worse prognosis. It seems important to motivate patients to reduce the extent of fluid intake between dialysis to prolong survival.