Global mean potassium intake: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Increasing potassium intake, especially in populations with low potassium intake and high sodium intake, has emerged as an important population-level intervention to reduce cardiovascular events. Current guideline recommendations, such as those made by the World Health Organisation, recommend a potassium intake of  > 3.5 g/day. We sought to determine summary estimates for mean potassium intake and sodium/potassium (Na/K) ratio in different regions of the world. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis. We identified 104 studies, that included 98 nationally representative surveys and 6 multi-national studies. To account for missingness and incomparability of data, a Bayesian hierarchical imputation model was applied to estimating summary estimates of mean dietary potassium intake (primary outcome) and sodium/potassium ratio. RESULTS: Overall, 104 studies from 52 countries were included (n = 1,640,664). Mean global potassium intake was 2.25 g/day (57 mmol/day) (95% credible interval (CI) 2.05-2.44 g/day), with highest intakes in Eastern and Western Europe (mean intake 3.53g/day, 95% CI 3.05-4.01 g/day and 3.29 g/day, 95% CI 3.13-3.47 g/day, respectively) and lowest intakes in East Asia (mean intake 1.89 g/day; 95% CI 1.55-2.25 g/day). Approximately 31% (95% CI, 30-41%) of global population included have an estimated potassium intake  > 2.5 g/day, with 14% (95% CI 11-17%) above 3.5 g/day. CONCLUSION: Global mean potassium intake (2.25 g/day) falls below current guideline recommended intake level of  > 3.5 g/day, with only 14% (95% CI 11-17%) of the global population achieving guideline-target mean intake. There was considerable regional variation, with lowest mean potassium intake reported in Asia, and highest intake in Eastern and Western Europe.

Antiplatelet therapy and incident cognitive impairment or dementia-a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE: The benefit of antiplatelet therapy in preventing cognitive impairment or dementia is uncertain. We investigated the association between antiplatelet therapy and incident cognitive impairment or dementia in randomised clinical trials. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE and CENTRAL for randomised clinical trials published from database inception through 1 February 2023. Trials that evaluated the association of antiplatelet therapy with incident cognitive impairment or dementia were included. For single-agent antiplatelet, the control group was placebo. For dual agent antiplatelet therapy, the control group was single-agent monotherapy. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to report pooled treatment effects and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary outcome was incident cognitive impairment or dementia. Secondary outcomes included change in cognitive test scores. RESULTS: A total of 11 randomised clinical trials were included (109,860 participants). All reported the incidence of cognitive impairment or dementia on follow-up. The mean (SD) age of trial participants was 66.2 (7.9) years. Antiplatelet therapy was not significantly associated with a reduced risk of cognitive impairment or dementia (11 trials; 109,860 participants) (3.49% versus 4.18% of patients over a mean trial follow-up of 5.8 years; odds ratio [OR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.88-1.00]; absolute risk reduction, 0.2% [95% CI, -0.4% to 0.009%]; I2 = 0.0%). Antiplatelet therapy was not significantly associated with mean change in cognitive test scores. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis, antiplatelet therapy was not significantly associated with a lower risk of incident cognitive impairment or dementia, but the CIs around this outcome do not exclude a modest preventative effect.

Does prior use of antiplatelet therapy modify the effect of dual antiplatelet therapy in transient ischaemic attack/minor ischaemic stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The purpose was to determine whether prior use of antiplatelet therapy modifies the effect of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute minor ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed comparing dual antiplatelet therapy to aspirin that reported subgroup analysis by prior antiplatelet use, adhering to the Cochrane Collaboration Guidelines. A fixed-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate a pooled treatment effect overall in subgroups with prior aspirin therapy and without prior aspirin therapy. Difference in treatment effect was assessed by testing p for interaction. The primary outcome measure was recurrent vascular events. RESULTS: Three eligible randomized controlled trials were identified, including 4831 participants with pre-existing antiplatelet use and 16,236 participants without pre-existing aspirin use. Recurrent vascular events occurred in 7.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.3-10) of those without pre-existing aspirin use versus 7.3% (95% CI 4.1-10) of those receiving prior aspirin therapy. Effect of dual antiplatelet therapy on the primary outcome measure was consistent in participants with no prior aspirin use (odds ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.66-0.84) compared to those taking aspirin before randomization (odds ratio 0.79, 95% CI 0.63-0.998) (p interaction = 0.66). The number needed to treat in the aspirin-naïve group was 55 (95% CI 37-107) compared to 66 (95% CI 32 to -746) in those on prior aspirin therapy. CONCLUSIONS: It was found that the effectiveness of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with minor ischaemic stroke or high risk transient ischaemic attack does not significantly differ in patients with prior aspirin exposure; therefore there should be no influence on the decision to use dual antiplatelet therapy.