Cardiovascular safety of using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for gout: a Danish nationwide case-crossover study.

Gout attacks are treated with uric-lowering and anti-inflammatory drugs. In patients with gout, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) could be both cardiovascular beneficial, due to their anti-inflammatory actions, and cardiovascular hazardous, due to their prothrombotic, hypertensive, and proarrhythmic side effects. We, therefore, examined the risk of cardiovascular events associated with NSAID use in patients with gout. We conducted a nationwide, population-based case-crossover study of all Danes ≥ 18 years of age with first-time gout during 1997-2020, who experienced a cardiovascular event (myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation/flutter, or cardiovascular death) (n = 59,150). The exposure was use of NSAIDs, overall and according to type (ibuprofen, naproxen, or diclofenac). We used the dates 300, 240, 180, and 120 before the outcome date as reference dates. We used the Mantel-Haenszel method to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the association between NSAID use and cardiovascular events. NSAID use was overall associated with 12% decreased odds of a cardiovascular event (OR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.85-0.91). This decreased odds ratio was observed for the use of ibuprofen (OR = 0.92, 95% CI: 0.88-0.97) and naproxen (OR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.74-0.97), but not for the use of diclofenac (OR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.90-1.05). Overall, use of NSAIDs was associated with decreased odds of all the individual components of the composite outcome. NSAIDs were not associated with an increased cardiovascular event rate when used in gout patients. Ibuprofen and naproxen appeared to have better cardiovascular risk profiles than diclofenac.

Bone Structure and Predictors of Fracture in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes.

CONTEXT: Type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus are associated with an increased risk of fracture. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to compare the bone structure and density between type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients and to investigate fracture associations. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study. SETTING AND PATIENTS: Physician-diagnosed type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients were included from the outpatient clinics at two university hospitals participated in the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Bone density and structure were assessed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and high-resolution peripheral quantitative computed tomography. Blood samples were collected for bone turnover markers. Prevalent vertebral fractures were assessed by vertebral fracture assessment and x-ray, and incident fractures were collected from The Danish National Hospital Discharge Register. RESULTS: Bone mineral density (BMD) was higher in type 2 than type 1 diabetes patients at the hip, femur, and spine; however, only the hip differed in multivariate-adjusted models. Bone tissue stiffness at the tibia was increased in type 2 diabetes patients also in adjusted models. Sclerostin levels were inversely associated with fracture in type 1 diabetes patients. The patients with the highest tertile of sclerostin had an 81% decreased risk of a fracture compared with the lowest tertile. CONCLUSIONS: Type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients differ in BMD of the hip and tissue stiffness at the tibia. Sclerostin may be a marker independent of BMD to predict fractures in type 1 diabetes patients and thus potentially of clinical importance. Studies with longer follow-up are needed.