Safety of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Low LDL-C: Is It all Good News?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review presents the risks and benefits of very low LDL cholesterol and the safety of using lipid-lowering therapy to achieve these levels.

RECENT FINDINGS

A growing body of literature suggests that lower LDL cholesterol levels are associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease. Further, achieving these levels with pharmaceuticals is remarkably safe. Although statins may slightly increase the risk of diabetes mellitus and hemorrhagic stroke, the benefits outweigh the risks. While recommendations from professional societies are increasingly aggressive, additional risk reduction could be achieved by setting more even ambitious LDL cholesterol goals.

How safe are proprotein convertase subtilisinekexin type 9 inhibitors in diabetes?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To examine the safety of proprotein convertase subtilisinekexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors in patients with diabetes, specifically focusing on their impact on glucose metabolism.

RECENT FINDINGS

Patients with diabetes often require intensified lipid-lowering therapy. PCSK9 inhibitors can reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) concentrations by approximately 60%, and significantly reduce cardiovascular risk when added to statin therapy. Some studies have suggested an association between low LDL-C levels and an increased risk of new-onset diabetes, and genetics has almost consistently shown an increased glucose concentration and risk of diabetes. Most clinical trials have not demonstrated a deterioration in glycaemic control in patients with diabetes after the use of PCSK9 inhibitors, and they do not lead to other significant treatment-emergent adverse events.

SUMMARY

Although the majority of patients with diabetes are undergoing background statin therapy, which may mask potential adverse effects of PCSK9 inhibitors on glycaemic control, current data suggest that the benefits outweigh the risks for diabetic patients using PCSK9 inhibitors. Considering the different nature of genetic studies and of clinical trials, close monitoring of glucose parameters is necessary, especially in individuals with prediabetes.

Safety profile of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors alirocumab and evolocumab: an updated meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

The use of alirocumab and evolocumab is generally safe and well-tolerated. However, concerns remain about their long-term safety, especially with regard to new-onset or worsening diabetes mellitus (DM). We aim to assess the safety profile of alirocumab and evolocumab compared to comparator.

METHODS

Studies were retrieved comparing the safety of PCSK9i vs. comparator (placebo or statin with or without ezetimibe). The primary outcome was adverse events leading to death. Secondary outcomes included serious adverse events, new onset diabetes mellitus (DM), worsening of DM, neurocognitive dysfunction, creatine kinase (CK) elevation, elevation of liver enzymes and local injection site reaction. Factors associated with the treatment effect were determined by meta-regression analysis. Subgroup analyses were done to explore potential treatment effect differences based on PCSK9i type and treatment duration.

RESULTS

We identified 56 studies with 85,123 adults (29.14% females). PCSK9i was not associated with adverse events that lead to death (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.04, p = 0.22). Between the two PCSK9i, alirocumab decreased adverse events leading to death (OR 0.79, 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.94, p = 0.008). PCSK9i was associated with less serious events compared to the comparator (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98, p < 0.001). This reduction was driven mainly by alirocumab (OR 0.89, 95% CI, 0.85 to 0.93, p < 0.001). Evolocumab worsened DM (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.26 to 4.2, p = 0.041). Subgroup analysis showed worsening of DM in the first 24 weeks of treatment with odds being highest in the first 12 weeks of treatment (<12 weeks: OR 3.82, 95% CI 1.13 to 12.99, p = 0.03; 12-24 weeks OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.20 to 3.73, p = 0.01. On the other hand, therapy >24 weeks reduced the odds of worsening DM (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.99, p = 0.04). PCSK9i did not increase cognitive dysfunction, (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.18, p = 0.76), or cause elevations in liver enzyme (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.03, p = 0.14), or CK (OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.04, p = 0.10). However, PCSK9i was associated with local injection site reaction (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.73, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Alirocumab decreased adverse events leading to death. Alirocumab and Evolocumab both decreased serious adverse events. PCSK9i did not increase new onset DM however evolocumab worsened DM in the first 24 weeks of treatment. PCSK9i did not increase neurologic dysfunction, and did not elevate liver enzymes and CK, however it was associated with local injection site reaction.

PCSK9 inhibition: from effectiveness to cost-effectiveness

Dyslipidaemia is a complex disorder characterised by abnormal lipid levels in the blood, including cholesterol and triglycerides, and plays an important role in the development of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Most risk factors for cardiovascular disease are modifiable, and dyslipidaemia is a key factor among them. It can result from a combination of genetic and environmental factors. A distinction is made between primary dyslipidaemia, which is mainly caused by inherited genetic changes, and secondary dyslipidaemia, which is due to underlying diseases or certain medications. The treatment of dyslipidaemia has evolved over the years. In the past, statins were the first choice, but newer drugs, such as proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors, have gained prominence due to their effectiveness in lowering lipids. Although recent guidelines recommend PCSK9 inhibitors for high-risk patients and patients who cannot tolerate statins, their widespread use is limited because of cost. Several meta-analyses have confirmed the efficacy and safety of PCSK9 inhibitors and have shown a significant reduction in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels. However, the long-term side effects and interactions with other risk factors for cardiovascular disease remain uncertain. In addition, cost-effectiveness analyses have shown mixed results, with some countries considering PCSK9 inhibitors to be cost-effective for certain patient groups, while others consider them less economical. Meanwhile, initial data from patients using PCSK9 inhibitors support the results of the clinical trials. To summarise, PCSK9 inhibitors represent a revolutionary solution for lowering LDL cholesterol, but their cost-effectiveness remains controversial. Despite the controversy, they offer clear benefits for high-risk patients and should therefore be considered in the treatment of dyslipidaemia.

Cost-effectiveness of adding ezetimibe and/or PCSK9 inhibitors to high-dose statins for secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease in Chinese adults

OBJECTIVES

The latest international guideline recommended the add-on therapy of ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors in selected people for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs). However, it remains unclear whether these regimens fit the Chinese healthcare system economically.

METHODS

Based on the Chinese context, this simulation study evaluated four therapeutic strategies including the high-dose statin-only group, ezetimibe plus statin group, PCSK9 inhibitors plus statin group, and PCSK9 inhibitors plus ezetimibe plus statin group. The team developed a Markov model to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). With each 1-yr cycle, the simulation subjects could have nonfatal cardiovascular events (stroke and/or myocardial infarction) or death (vascular or nonvascular death event) with a follow-up duration of 20 yr. Cardiovascular risk reduction was gathered from a network meta-analysis, and cost and utility data were gathered from hospital databases and published research.

RESULTS

For Chinese adults receiving high-dose statins for secondary prevention of CVDs, the ICER was US$68,910 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for adding PCSK9 inhibitors, US$20,242 per QALY for adding ezetimibe, US$51,552 per QALY for adding both drugs. Given a threshold of US$37,655 (three times of Chinese GDP), the probability of cost-effectiveness is 2.9 percent for adding PCSK9 inhibitors, 53.1 percent for adding ezetimibe, and 16.8 percent for adding both drugs. To meet the cost-effectiveness, an acquisition price reduction of PCSK9 inhibitors of 33.6 percent is necessary.

CONCLUSION

In Chinese adults receiving high-dose statins for the secondary prevention of CVDs, adding ezetimibe is cost-effective compared to adding PCSK9 inhibitors and adding both drugs.

Professional medical education approaches: mobilizing evidence for clinicians

Rapidly proliferating high-quality evidence supports daily decision-making in clinical practice. Continuing professional medical education links this evidence to practicing clinicians who are strongly motivated to improve the quality of their care by using the latest information. Approaches to professional education vary, and their effects depend on specific scenarios. This narrative review summarizes the main approaches for professional medical education that facilitate the mobilization of evidence for clinicians. It includes traditional learning (passive and active dissemination of educational materials, lectures, and mass media dissemination), constructivist learning (engaging in local consensus processes and education outreach visits, interfacing with local opinion leaders, conducting patient-mediated interventions, employing audit and feedback processes, and utilizing clinical decision-supporting systems), and blended learning approaches (the integration of in-person or online passive learning with active and creative learning by the learners). An optimized selection from these approaches is challenging but critical to clinicians and healthcare systems.

Advanced progress of the relationship between PCSK9 monoclonal antibodies and hyperglycemic adverse events

Purpose of Review

Long-term use of statins had been confirmed to cause an increase in hyperglycemic adverse events (HAEs), whose mechanism has been well understood. Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) monoclonal antibodies (PCSK9-mAbs), a kind of new lipid-lowering drug, can effectively reduce plasma low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in patients with CHD and have been widely used. However, animal experiments, Mendelian randomization studies, clinical researches and Meta-analyses which focused on the relationship between PCSK9-mAbs and HAEs had reached different conclusions, which has attracted great attention from clinicians.

Recent Findings

The newest FOURIER-OLE randomized controlled trial followed PCSK9-mAbs users for over 8 years, whose results suggested that long-term use of PCSK9-mAbs did not increase the incidence of HAEs. Newest Meta-analyses also indicated that there was no relationship between PCSK9-mAbs and NOD. Meanwhile, genetic polymorphisms and variants related to PCSK9 might have effects on HAEs.

Conclusion

According to the results of current studies, there is no significant relationship between PCSK9-mAbs and HAEs. However, longer-term follow-up studies are still needed to confirm it. Although PCSK9 genetic polymorphisms and variants may affect the possible occurrence of HAEs, there is no need to perform relevant genetic testing before applying PCSK9-mAbs.

Effect of alirocumab on cataracts in patients with acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND

Some data suggest that low levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) are associated with risk of cataracts. Proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors reduce LDL-C below levels achieved with statins alone. We determined whether the incidence of cataracts was influenced by treatment with the PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab versus placebo, and whether that incidence was affected by achieved LDL-C levels.

METHODS

The ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial (NCT01663402) compared alirocumab with placebo in 18,924 patients with recent acute coronary syndrome receiving high-intensity or maximum-tolerated statin. Incident cataracts were pre-specified events of interest. In multivariable analysis using propensity score-matching on characteristics including cataract risk factors, incident cataracts were compared in the alirocumab and placebo groups according to LDL-C levels achieved with alirocumab.

RESULTS

Over median follow-up of 2.8 years (interquartile range 2.3 - 3.4), the incidence of cataracts was similar with alirocumab (127/9462 [1.3%]) versus placebo (134/9462 [1.4%]); hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.74 - 1.20). In patients treated with alirocumab with ≥ 2 LDL-C values < 25 mg/dL (0.65 mmol/L), the incidence of cataracts was 71/4305 (1.6%), versus 60/4305 (1.4%) in propensity score-matched patients from the placebo group (HR 1.10, CI 95% 0.78 - 1.55). In patients treated with alirocumab with ≥ 2 LDL-C values < 15 mg/dL (0.39 mmol/L), the incidence of cataracts was 13/782 (1.7%), versus 36/2346 (1.5%) in matched patients from the placebo group (HR 1.03, CI 95% 0.54 - 1.94).

CONCLUSION

Treatment with alirocumab versus placebo, added to statin, did not influence the incidence of cataracts, even when achieved LDL-C levels on alirocumab were very low. Longer follow-up studies might be necessary to exclude the long-term effects on the incidence or progression of cataracts.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01663402 .

Global Burden Attributable to High Low-Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol From 1990 to 2019

Background

High low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) is a public health issue contributing to ischemic heart disease (IHD) and stroke.

Method

In this ecological study, we collected summary exposure values (SEVs), deaths, disability-adjusted life of years (DALYs), and Social Demographic Index (SDI) of high LDL-C from 1990 to 2019 using the query tool from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) Collaborative Network. Outcomes include SEVs, deaths, and DALYs attributable to high LDL-C stratified by sex, age, region, SDI, countries, and territories. Estimated annual percentage changes (EAPCs) were applied to estimate annual trends of changes in these outcomes. We applied the weighted segmented regression with break-point estimation to detect the linear piecewise relationship between SDI and high LDL-C disease burden.

Results

Globally, 3.00 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 2.35-3.76 million) people in 1990 and 4.40 million (95% UI, 3.30-5.65 million) people died from high LDL-C in 2019. The absolute annual burden from deaths and DALYs attributed to high LDL-C increased by 46% (95% UI, 35-56%) and 41% (95% UI, 31-50%) from 1990 to 2019. The age-standardized SEV, death, and DALY was decreased by 9% (95% UI, -11 to -8%), 37% (95% UI, -41-33%), and 32% (95% UI, -37 to -28%), respectively, during the study period. There was a negative association between SDI and high LDL-C-related age-standardized death and DALY rates when SDI surpassed 0.71 and 0.71, respectively.

Conclusion

Although the overall age-standardized burden of high LDL-C is controlled in the past 30 years, it remains increasing in moderate SDI countries, and decreasing trends are disappearing in high SDI countries. New challenges require new actions stratified by countries with different SDI levels.

PCSK9 inhibitors and ezetimibe with or without statin therapy for cardiovascular risk reduction: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the impact of ezetimibe and proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors on cardiovascular outcomes in adults taking maximally tolerated statin therapy or who are statin intolerant.

DESIGN

Network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library up to 31 December 2020.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Randomised controlled trials of ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors with ≥500 patients and follow-up of ≥6 months.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We performed frequentist fixed-effects network meta-analysis and GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation) to assess certainty of evidence. Results included relative risks (RR) and absolute risks per 1000 patients treated for five years for non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), non-fatal stroke, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular mortality. We estimated absolute risk differences assuming constant RR (estimated from network meta-analysis) across different baseline therapies and cardiovascular risk thresholds; the PREDICT risk calculator estimated cardiovascular risk in primary and secondary prevention. Patients were categorised at low to very high cardiovascular risk. A guideline panel and systematic review authors established the minimal important differences (MID) of 12 per 1000 for MI and 10 per 1000 for stroke.

RESULTS

We identified 14 trials assessing ezetimibe and PCSK9 inhibitors among 83 660 adults using statins. Adding ezetimibe to statins reduced MI (RR 0.87 (95% confidence interval 0.80 to 0.94)) and stroke (RR 0.82 (0.71 to 0.96)) but not all-cause mortality (RR 0.99 (0.92 to 1.06)) or cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.97 (0.87 to 1.09)). Similarly, adding PCSK9 inhibitor to statins reduced MI (0.81 (0.76 to 0.87)) and stroke (0.74 (0.64 to 0.85)) but not all-cause (0.95 (0.87 to 1.03)) or cardiovascular mortality (0.95 (0.87 to 1.03)). Among adults with very high cardiovascular risk, adding PCSK9 inhibitor was likely to reduce MI (16 per 1000) and stroke (21 per 1000) (moderate to high certainty); whereas adding ezetimibe was likely to reduce stroke (14 per 1000), but the reduction of MI (11 per 1000) (moderate certainty) did not reach MID. Adding ezetimibe to PCSK9 inhibitor and statin may reduce stroke (11 per 1000), but the reduction of MI (9 per 1000) (low certainty) did not reach MID. Adding PCSK9 inhibitors to statins and ezetimibe may reduce MI (14 per 1000) and stroke (17 per 1000) (low certainty). Among adults with high cardiovascular risk, adding PCSK9 inhibitor probably reduced MI (12 per 1000) and stroke (16 per 1000) (moderate certainty); adding ezetimibe probably reduced stroke (11 per 1000), but the reduction in MI did not achieve MID (8 per 1000) (moderate certainty). Adding ezetimibe to PCSK9 inhibitor and statins did not reduce outcomes beyond MID, while adding PCSK9 inhibitor to ezetimibe and statins may reduce stroke (13 per 1000). These effects were consistent in statin-intolerant patients. Among moderate and low cardiovascular risk groups, adding PCSK9 inhibitor or ezetimibe to statins yielded little or no benefit for MI and stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

Ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors may reduce non-fatal MI and stroke in adults at very high or high cardiovascular risk who are receiving maximally tolerated statin therapy or are statin-intolerant, but not in those with moderate and low cardiovascular risk.

PCSK9 inhibitors and ezetimibe for the reduction of cardiovascular events: a clinical practice guideline with risk-stratified recommendations

CLINICAL QUESTION

In adults with low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels >1.8 mmol/L (>70 mg/dL) who are already taking the maximum dose of statins or are intolerant to statins, should another lipid-lowering drug be added, either a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor or ezetimibe, to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events? If so, which drug is preferred? Having decided to use one, should we add the other lipid-lowering drug?

CURRENT PRACTICE

Most guidelines emphasise LDL cholesterol targets in their recommendations for prescribing PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe in adults at high risk of experiencing a major adverse cardiovascular event. However, to achieve these goals in very high risk patients with statins alone is almost impossible, so physicians are increasingly considering other lipid-lowering drugs solely for achieving LDL cholesterol treatment goals rather than for achieving important absolute cardiovascular risk reduction. Most guidelines do not systematically assess the cardiovascular benefits of adding PCSK9 inhibitors and/or ezetimibe for all risk groups across primary and secondary prevention, nor do they report, in accordance with explicit judgments of assumed patients' values and preferences, absolute benefits and harms and potential treatment burdens.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The guideline panel provided mostly weak recommendations, which means we rely on shared decision making when applying these recommendations. For adults already using statins, the panel suggests adding a second lipid-lowering drug in people at very high and high cardiovascular risk but recommends against adding it in people at low cardiovascular risk. For adults who are intolerant to statins, the panel recommends using a lipid-lowering drug in people at very high and high cardiovascular risk but against adding it in those at low cardiovascular risk. When choosing to add another lipid-lowering drug, the panel suggests ezetimibe in preference to PCSK9 inhibitors. The panel suggests further adding a PCSK9 inhibitor to ezetimibe for adults already taking statins at very high risk and those at very high and high risk who are intolerant to statins.

HOW THIS GUIDELINE WAS CREATED

An international panel including patients, clinicians, and methodologists produced these recommendations following standards for trustworthy guidelines and using the GRADE approach. The panel identified four risk groups of patients (low, moderate, high, and very high cardiovascular risk) and primarily applied an individual patient perspective in moving from evidence to recommendations, though societal issues were a secondary consideration. The panel considered the balance of benefits and harms and burdens of starting a PCSK9 inhibitor and/or ezetimibe, making assumptions of adults' average values and preferences. Interactive evidence summaries and decision aids accompany multi-layered recommendations, developed in an online authoring and publication platform (www.magicapp.org) that also allows re-use and adaptation.

THE EVIDENCE

A linked systematic review and network meta-analysis (14 trials including 83 660 participants) of benefits found that PCSK9 inhibitors or ezetimibe probably reduce myocardial infarctions and stroke in patients with very high and high cardiovascular risk, with no impact on mortality (moderate to high certainty evidence), but not in those with moderate and low cardiovascular risk. PCSK9 inhibitors may have similar effects to ezetimibe on reducing non-fatal myocardial infarction or stroke (low certainty evidence). These relative benefits were consistent, but their absolute magnitude varied based on cardiovascular risk in individual patients (for example, for 1000 people treated with PCSK9 inhibitors in addition to statins over five years, benefits ranged from 2 fewer strokes in the lowest risk to 21 fewer in the highest risk). Two systematic reviews on harms found no important adverse events for these drugs (moderate to high certainty evidence). PCSK9 inhibitors require injections that sometimes result in injection site reactions (best estimate 15 more per 1000 in a 5 year timeframe), representing a burden and harm that may matter to patients. The MATCH-IT decision support tool allows you to interact with the evidence and your patients across the alternative options: https://magicevidence.org/match-it/220504dist-lipid-lowering-drugs/.

UNDERSTANDING THE RECOMMENDATIONS

The stratification into four cardiovascular risk groups means that, to use the recommendations, physicians need to identify their patient's risk first. We therefore suggest, specific to various geographical regions, using some reliable risk calculators that estimate patients' cardiovascular risk based on a mix of known risk factors. The largely weak recommendations concerning the addition of ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors reflect what the panel considered to be a close balance between small reductions in stroke and myocardial infarctions weighed against the burdens and limited harms.Because of the anticipated large variability of patients' values and preferences, well informed choices warrant shared decision making. Interactive evidence summaries and decision aids linked to the recommendations can facilitate such shared decisions. The strong recommendations against adding another drug in people at low cardiovascular risk reflect what the panel considered to be a burden without important benefits. The strong recommendation for adding either ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors in people at high and very high cardiovascular risk reflect a clear benefit.The panel recognised the key uncertainty in the evidence concerning patient values and preferences, namely that what most people consider important reductions in cardiovascular risks, weighed against burdens and harms, remains unclear. Finally, availability and costs will influence decisions when healthcare systems, clinicians, or people consider adding ezetimibe or PCSK9 inhibitors.

PCSK9 Inhibition and Risk of Diabetes: Should We Worry?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Since the clinical benefit of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors occurs in a setting of reducing low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) to unprecedentedly low levels, it becomes of interest to investigate possible adverse effects pertaining to the risk of new-onset diabetes (NOD).

RECENT FINDINGS

While safety results reported in either meta-analyses or cardiovascular outcome trials FOURIER (with evolocumab) and ODYSSEY (with alirocumab) did not rise the incidence of NOD, Mendelian randomization analyses were almost concordant in showing an increased risk of NOD. This evidence was in line with post-marketing safety reports highlighting that evolocumab and alirocumab were primarily related to mild hyperglycaemia rather than diabetes, with most of the hyperglycaemic events occurring during the first 6 months of treatment. Considering the different nature of genetic studies and of randomized controlled trials, with careful monitoring of patients, particularly in the earlier phases of treatment, and the identification of those more susceptible to develop NOD, treatment with PCSK9 inhibitors should be of minimal concern.

Impact of admission and early persistent stress hyperglycaemia on clinical outcomes in acute pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

To determine the impact of glucose levels at admission and during first week (early phase) on clinical outcomes in patients with acute pancreatitis (AP) and to investigate the relationship between stress hyperglycaemia (SHG) and hypertriglyceridaemia (HTG).

METHODS

Two independent and prospective databases were retrospectively analysed (n = 1792). Patients admitted with pain of less than 48 hours and confirmed AP were included. SHG was defined as admission blood glucose ≥ 10.00 mmol/L (non-diabetic) or ≥ 16.67 mmol/L (diabetic). Blood glucose records for the first week were inspected to determine whether SHG lasted ≥ 48 hours (persistent) or < 48 hours (transient). Clinical outcomes were compared between designated patient groups using multivariate and trend analyses. The correlation between SHG and HTG (serum triglyceride ≥ 5.65 mmol/L) was also analysed.

RESULTS

On admission, SHG was present in 27.8% (499/1792) patients; during the first 48 hours of admission, transient and persistent SHG was found in 31% (556/1792) and 8.0% (144/1792) patients, respectively. Admission SHG was associated with higher incidence of persistent organ failure, acute necrotic collection, major infection, and mortality as well as prolonged length of hospital stay (all P < 0.05). Duration of SHG was also associated with worsened clinical outcomes (all P < 0.05). In HTG-AP patients, more severe clinical outcomes were observed in those who concomitantly had SHG (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Admission and persistent SHG during the first week of admission worsens clinical outcomes of AP patients. These effects are more pronounced when admission HTG co-existed.