《心房颤动患者的地高辛水平和死亡率》

  • 来源专题:心血管疾病防治
  • 编译者: 张燕舞
  • 发布时间:2018-05-22
  • 地高辛在心房颤动(AF)房率控制中的作用多年来基于对死亡率增加的担忧而受到质疑。 ARISTOTLE试验(比较大约18,000例房颤患者的抗凝治疗)的一项表现良好的事后亚组分析显示,地高辛的使用与≥1.2ng / mL水平的死亡风险显着相关。 我们几乎从不使用地高辛作为第一个控制率的药物,很少将其添加到其他控制率的药物中。

    BACKGROUND Digoxin is widely used in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

    OBJECTIVES The goal of this paper was to explore whether digoxin use was independently associated with increased mortality in patients with AF and if the association was modified by heart failure and/or serum digoxin concentration.

    METHODS The association between digoxin use and mortality was assessed in 17,897 patients by using a propensity score-adjusted analysis and in new digoxin users during the trial versus propensity score-matched control participants. The authors investigated the independent association between serum digoxin concentration and mortality after multivariable adjustment.

    RESULTS At baseline, 5,824 (32.5%) patients were receiving digoxin. Baseline digoxin use was not associated with an increased risk of death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96 to 1.23; p = 0.19). However, patients with a serum digoxin concentration ≥1.2 ng/ml had a 56% increased hazard of mortality (adjusted HR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.20 to 2.04) compared with those not on digoxin. When analyzed as a continuous variable, serum digoxin concentration was associated with a 19% higher adjusted hazard of death for each 0.5-ng/ml increase (p = 0.0010); these results were similar for patients with and without heart failure. Compared with propensity score-matched control participants, the risk of death (adjusted HR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.37 to 2.31) and sudden death (adjusted HR: 2.14; 95% CI: 1.11 to 4.12) was significantly higher in new digoxin users.

    CONCLUSIONS In patients with AF taking digoxin, the risk of death was independently related to serum digoxin concentration and was highest in patients with concentrations ≥1.2 ng/ml. Initiating digoxin was independently associated with higher mortality in patients with AF, regardless of heart failure.

相关报告
  • 《血清纤维蛋白原/白蛋白比值预测急性心肌梗死患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗后住院期间新发房颤的风险:一项回顾性研究》

    • 来源专题:重大慢性病
    • 编译者:黄雅兰
    • 发布时间:2023-09-12
    • 背景:新发心房颤动(NOAF)是急性心肌梗死(AMI)患者经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的常见不良后果,并与住院时间和预后密切相关。近年来,血清纤维蛋白原/白蛋白比(FAR)作为炎症和血栓形成的新生物标志物,已被用于预测冠状动脉疾病的严重程度和预后。我们的研究旨在调查AMI患者PCI术后住院期间FAR和NOAF的关系。 方法:回顾性分析670例急性心肌梗死患者PCI术后住院期间和随访期间NOAF的发生率。收集的数据包括患者年龄、性别、体重指数、病史、当前药物治疗、心力衰竭、实验室检查、罪犯血管、超声心动图特征和AMI类型。入选患者被分为NOAF组和非NOAF组。比较两组患者的基线特征,并使用logistic回归分析和受试者工作特征曲线评估FAR和NOAF之间的预测相关性。 结果:53名(7.9%)患者在住院期间发生NOAF。除了年龄较大、中性粒细胞计数较高、左心房较大、入院时Killip分级较差、体重指数较低、血小板计数较低、左心室射血分数较低和目标性左旋支动脉疾病外,NOAF的发生与FAR较高独立相关。FAR对住院期间NOAF的发生表现出更好的预测值(曲线下面积,0.732;95%置信区间,0.659-0.808)。 结论:FAR是预测急性心肌梗死患者PCI术后住院期间NOAF风险的可靠工具,比单独使用血清纤维蛋白和血清白蛋白水平具有更好的预测价值。
  • 《窦性心律患者心力衰竭患者缺乏阿司匹林的益处》

    • 来源专题:心血管疾病防治
    • 编译者:张燕舞
    • 发布时间:2018-05-22
    • 阿司匹林对心力衰竭窦性心律患者的安全性和有效性尚不确定。 在对无心房颤动病史的心力衰竭患者进行的一项登记研究中,3840名服用小剂量阿司匹林的患者倾向于同样数量的未服用阿司匹林的患者倾向匹配阿司匹林和非阿司匹林组的死亡率和卒中率相似。 然而,在阿司匹林组中观察到较高的心力衰竭再入院率,这在一些但不是全部的先前研究中已经观察到。 阿司匹林的使用也与心肌梗塞风险增加有关,但不能排除残余混杂。 我们建议不要使用阿司匹林治疗心力衰竭患者,而没有针对这种治疗的具体指征。 OBJECTIVES This study sought to assess safety and effectiveness of low-dose aspirin in heart failure (HF) not complicated by atrial fibrillation. BACKGROUND Despite lack of evidence, low-dose aspirin is widely used in patients with HF and sinus rhythm with and without prior ischemic heart disease. METHODS The study included 12,277 patients with new-onset HF during 2007 to 2012 who had no history of atrial fibrillation. Of 5,450 patients using low-dose aspirin at baseline, 3,840 were propensity matched to non-aspirin users in a 1:1 ratio. Propensity-matched Cox models were calculated with respect to the primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke and the secondary outcomes of bleeding and HF readmission. RESULTS The composite outcome occurred in 1,554 (40.5%) patients in the aspirin group and 1,604 (41.8%) patients in the non-aspirin group. Aspirin use was not associated with an altered risk of composite outcome (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91 to 1.05), but it was associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction (HR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.67), whereas no differences were observed in all-cause mortality and stroke. An increased risk of HF readmission was observed in the aspirin group (HR: 1.25; 95% CI: 1.17 to 1.33). No difference in bleeding was observed. In subgroup analyses on the basis of a history of ischemic heart disease, the results were similar to the main result. CONCLUSIONS No association was detected between low-dose aspirin use and the composite outcome of all-cause mortality,