High-intensity Statin Treatments in Clinically Stable Patients on Aspirin Monotherapy 12 Months After Drug-eluting Stent Implantation: A Randomized Study

High-intensity statin therapy yields better outcomes in acute coronary syndrome patients: a meta-analysis involving 26,497 patients

Background

Whether high-intensity statin treatment provides more clinical benefits compared with standard statin regimens in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients remains controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to comparatively assess high-intensity and standard statin regimens for efficacy and safety in patients with ACS.

Methods

The PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies assessing high-intensity vs. standard statin regimens for ACS treatment from inception to April 2020. The publication language was limited to English, and 16 randomized controlled trials were finally included in this study, with a total of 26,497 patients.

Results

Compared to the standard statin regimens, the relative ratio (RR) of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in ACS patients treated by high-intensity statin was 0.77 (95%CI, 0.68–0.86; P < 0.00001; prediction interval, 0.56–1.07). In subgroup analysis, high-intensity statin therapy resulted in more clinical benefits regarding MACE compared with standard statin treatment in both Asian (RR = 0.77; 95%CI, 0.61–0.98; P = 0.03) and non-Asian (RR = 0.79; 95%CI, 0.71–0.89; P < 0.0001) patients. Although adverse events were acceptable in patients with ACS administered high-intensity statin therapy, this treatment was associated with a higher rate of adverse events (4.99% vs. 2.98%), including myopathy/myalgia and elevated liver enzymes, as reflected by elevated serum aminotransferase or aminotransferase amounts.

Conclusion

The current findings indicated that high-intensity statin therapy might be beneficial in patients with ACS, and close monitoring for adverse effects should be performed.

Changes in C-reactive protein in response to anti-inflammatory therapy as a predictor of cardiovascular outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Despite the availability of aggressive lipid-lowering strategies, many patients remain at risk of cardiovascular events. C-reactive protein is a marker of inflammation elevated in patients at high risk of cardiovascular events. C-reactive protein has demonstrated value as a predictor of cardiovascular risk; however, it is unclear whether targeting C-reactive protein levels improves outcomes. This systematic review aimed to characterise the relationship between C-reactive protein and cardiovascular outcomes and to assess whether the magnitude of C-reactive protein reduction correlates to the extent of cardiovascular risk reduction.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials that measured C-reactive protein before and after administration of therapies for cardiovascular disease and measured incidence of cardiovascular events. A meta-analysis of placebo-controlled studies assessed the relationship between extent of C-reactive protein reduction and cardiovascular risk reduction. Placebo-controlled studies where low-density lipoprotein and triglyceride data were available were also included in a meta-regression to assess the influence of these established risk factors on the efficacy of treatment when compared to C-reactive protein.

Results

Fifteen studies met the criteria for inclusion in this review, of which six were active comparator studies and nine were placebo controlled. Six placebo-controlled studies had data available for meta-regression. Eight studies demonstrated a reduction in events that could be explained by changes in lipid levels, whereas the results of five studies suggested that the association between C-reactive protein reduction and event rates cannot be explained by changes in lipid levels alone. No correlation was found between magnitude of C-reactive protein reduction and cardiovascular risk reduction. A strong correlation was found between C-reactive protein and low-density lipoprotein reduction (adjusted r ² = 0.8).

Conclusions

Targeting C-reactive protein does not offer additional benefit over targeting low-density lipoprotein across the general population in terms of cardiovascular risk reduction. However, there is value in targeting C-reactive protein in patients at high residual inflammatory risk despite non-elevated lipid levels or use of lipid-lowering therapy.

Contemporary use of lipid-lowering therapy for secondary prevention in Korean patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases

BACKGROUND/AIMS

We evaluated the contemporary use of lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) in Korean patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), and identified factors associated with statin non-prescription.

METHODS

Using the Korean Health Insurance Review and Assessment data, we identified LLT-naïve subjects newly diagnosed with ASCVD between 2011 and 2012, and followed up until 2015. LLT-naïve status was defined as no LLT prescription for 1 year before ASCVD diagnosis. ASCVD was defined as first hospitalization or emergency room visit for coronary artery disease (CAD), acute cerebrovascular disease (CVD), or peripheral artery disease (PAD). Statin intensity was defined per the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline for cholesterol treatment.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 80,884 subjects newly diagnosed with ASCVD, of whom only 48,725 (60.2%) received LLT during the follow-up period. Statin, combination of statin and non-statin, and non-statin LLT were administered in 50.5%, 9.7%, and 0.1% of all subjects, respectively. Statins were prescribed to 80.4% of CAD patients but only to 50.2% and 46.8% of CVD and PAD patients. Statin-based LLT usually had moderate- (77.2%) or high-intensity (18.5%). Subjects not prescribed statins were younger or older (< 40 or ≥ 70 years), more commonly female, and more likely to have comorbidities. Statins were prescribed at the time of ASCVD diagnosis in 45.5% of all subjects, and in 53.0% within 90 days of diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Only 60% of LLT-naïve Korean patients newly diagnosed with ASCVD received statins. Statins were often prescribed in subjects with CAD but less commonly in those with CVD or PAD. Moderate-intensity statins were most frequently used.

Fabrication and Characterization of Bioresorbable Drug-coated Porous Scaffolds for Vascular Tissue Engineering

Bioresorbable polymers have been studied for several decades as attractive candidates for promoting the advancement of medical science and bio-technology in modern society. In particular, with a well-defined architecture, bioresorbable polymers have prominent advantages over their bulk counterparts for applications in biomedical and implant devices, such as cell delivery, scaffolds for tissue engineering, and hydrogels as well as in the pharmaceutical fields. Biocompatible implant devices based on bioresorbable materials (for instance, bioresorbable polymers that combine the unique advantages of biocompability and easy handling) have emerged as a highly active field due to their promising applications in artificial implant systems and biomedical devices. In this paper, we report an approach to fabricate porous polycaprolactone (PCL) scaffolds using a 3D printing system. And its surface was treated to a hydrophilic surface using plasma treatment. Then, the aspirin and atorvastatin calcium salt mixture was dip coated onto the surface. The drug coating technology was used to deposit the drug material onto the scaffold surface. Our porous PCL scaffold was coated with aspirin and atorvastatin calcium salt to reduce the blood LDL cholesterol and restenosis. These results suggest that our approach may provide a promising scaffold for developing bioresorbable drug-delivery-biomaterials. We further demonstrate that our bioresorbable medical device can be used as vascular scaffolds to provide a wide range of applications for the design of medical devices.