A Comparative Study of Safety Outcomes of Sodium Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors and Loop Diuretics Among Diabetic Patients Using Real-world Data.

Sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and loop diuretics can cause volume depletion. However, the long-term safety of the concurrent use of both agents has not been widely evaluated. We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study to evaluate the safety of SGLT2 inhibitors with loop diuretics vs SGLT2 inhibitors alone among diabetic patients. The primary endpoint was a composite of volume-depletion adverse events at 1 month and 12 months. Of the 400 patients included, 98 received SGLT2 inhibitors with a loop diuretic and 302 received SGLT2 inhibitors alone. The concurrent use of SGLT2 inhibitors and loop diuretics was tolerated at 1 month; however, it resulted in a significant increase in volume-depletion events at 12 months (10.2% vs 1.7%; aHR = 7.03, 95% CI (1.80-27.37), P-value = 0.005). In conclusion, the long-term concurrent use of SGLT2 inhibitors and loop diuretics increases the risk of volume depletion, warranting frequent monitoring.

A Comparative Study of High-intensity Rosuvastatin Versus Atorvastatin Therapy Post-acute Coronary Syndrome Using Real-world Data.

A high-intensity statin is recommended for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVD). However, real-world evidence of the effectiveness of rosuvastatin following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is scarce. This retrospective cohort study included patients diagnosed with ACS to compare between the 2 high-intensity statin therapies (rosuvastatin vs atorvastatin) in terms of a primary composite outcome of CVD-associated death, non-fatal ACS, and non-fatal stroke at 1 month and 12 months post discharge. The primary effectiveness outcome did not differ between the 2 groups at 1 month (1.3% vs 1%; aHR = 1.64, 95% CI 0.55-4.94, P= 0.379) and at 12 months (4.8% vs 3.5%; aHR = 1.48, 95% CI 0.82-2.67, P= 0.199). Similarly, the 2 groups had comparable safety outcomes. In conclusion, the use of high-intensity rosuvastatin compared to high-intensity atorvastatin therapy in patients with ACS had resulted in comparable cardiovascular effectiveness and safety outcomes.

Prevalence and clinical significance of antiphospholipid antibodies in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 admitted to intensive care units: a prospective observational study.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) increases the risk of coagulopathy. Although the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPLs) has been proposed as a possible mechanism of COVID-19-induced coagulopathy, its clinical significance remains uncertain. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the prevalence and clinical significance of aPLs among critically ill patients with COVID-19. This prospective observational study included 60 patients with COVID-19 admitted to intensive care units (ICU). The study outcomes included prevalence of aPLs, and a primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality and arterial or venous thrombosis between antiphospholipid-positive and antiphospholipid-negative patients during their ICU stay. Multiple logistic regression was used to assess the influence of aPLs on the primary composite outcome of mortality and thrombosis. A total of 60 critically ill patients were enrolled. Among them, 57 (95%) were men, with a mean age of 52.8 ± 12.2 years, and the majority were from Asia (68%). Twenty-two patients (37%) were found be antiphospholipid-positive; 21 of them were positive for lupus anticoagulant, whereas one patient was positive for anti-ß2-glycoprotein IgG/IgM. The composite outcome of mortality and thrombosis during their ICU stay did not differ between antiphospholipid-positive and antiphospholipid-negative patients (4 [18%] vs. 6 [16%], adjusted odds ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.1-6.7; p value = 0.986). The presence of aPLs does not seem to affect the outcomes of critically ill patients with COVID-19 in terms of all-cause mortality and thrombosis. Therefore, clinicians may not screen critically ill patients with COVID-19 for aPLs unless deemed clinically appropriate.

Medications adherence post-primary percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction: A population-based cohort study.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: The use of medications for secondary prevention is the cornerstone in the treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD). However, adherence to these medications is still suboptimal worldwide. This retrospective observational study aimed to assess the adherence to post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) medications, along with predictors of non-adherence. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study to assess the adherence to post-PCI medications by determining the rate of prescription refills for 12 months after discharge among STEMI patients, as well as predictors of non-adherence. Adherence was assessed by medication availability 80% of the time monitored by the prescription refills rate for 1 year post-discharge. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: A total of 1334 patients who presented with STEMI and underwent primary PCI were included in our retrospective analysis. The majority of patients included were male (96%) with a mean age of 51 ± 10.2 years. The overall adherence rate for all medications was only 28.4%, with an individual adherence rate of 50.5% for aspirin, 49.9% for P2 Y12 inhibitors, 48.1% for statins, 39.6% for beta-blockers and 42.9% for angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB). Factors that increased the likelihood of non-adherence were prolonged hospital length of stay and getting the medications with charge (aOR = 1.94, 95% CI 1.1-3.3; p-value = 0.017, aOR = 1.87, 95% CI 1.1-3.3; p-value = 0.029, respectively), while having a regular follow-up after discharge and attending the first clinic appointment were significantly associated with decreased likelihood of non-adherence (aOR = 0.01, 95% CI 0.004-0.04; p-value < 0.001, aOR = 0.06, 95% CI 0.03-0.1; p-value < 0.001, respectively). WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The adherence rate to post-PCI medications among patients with STEMI was relatively low; however, attending the first outpatient clinic appointment and having a regular follow-up reduced the likelihood of non-adherence.

Clinical outcomes of high-intensity doses of atorvastatin in patients with acute coronary syndrome: A retrospective cohort study using real-world data.

AIMS: To compare the effectiveness and safety of 2 high-intensity atorvastatin doses (40 mg vs 80 mg) among acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients. METHODS: This retrospective observational cohort study using real-world data included patients admitted with ACS to the Heart Hospital in Qatar between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2018. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular disease-associated death, nonfatal ACS and nonfatal stroke. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to determine the association between the 2 high-intensity atorvastatin dosing regimens and the primary outcome at 1 month and 12 months postdischarge. RESULTS: Of the 626 patients included in the analyses, 475 (75.9%) received atorvastatin 40 mg, while 151 (24.1%) received atorvastatin 80 mg following ACS. Most of the patients were Asian (73%), male (97%) with a mean age of 50 years and presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (60%). The incidence of the primary effectiveness outcome did not differ between the atorvastatin 40-and 80-mg groups at 1 month (0.8 vs 1.3%; adjusted hazard ratio = 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.04-8.13, P = .690) and at 12 months (3.2 vs 4%; adjusted hazard ratio = 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.18-1.80, P = .340). Similarly, the use of the 2 doses of atorvastatin resulted in comparable safety outcomes, including liver toxicity, myopathy and rhabdomyolysis with an event rate of <1% in both groups. CONCLUSION: The use of atorvastatin 40 mg in comparison to atorvastatin 80 mg in patients with ACS resulted in similar cardiovascular effectiveness and safety outcomes.