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.

Torsemide versus furosemide after acute decompensated heart failure: a retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Loop diuretics are recommended by clinical practice guidelines to treat volume overload in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF). The effectiveness of switching furosemide to torsemide versus optimizing the furosemide dose following ADHF has not yet been evaluated. METHODS: This retrospective observational study aimed to assess the impact of switching furosemide to torsemide versus optimizing the furosemide dose after ADHF on HF-related hospitalization within 1 month and 6 months of discharge. The study included patients previously on furosemide admitted with ADHF to the Heart Hospital in Qatar between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2017. The study included 2 groups: (1) patients discharged on torsemide; and (2) patients discharged on an optimized furosemide dose. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to determine the association between diuretic use and hospitalization. RESULTS: Of the 232 patients included, 45 received torsemide and 187 received an optimized furosemide dose upon discharge. The majority of patients included were males (54%) with a mean age of 67 ± 12 years, and presented with HF with reduced ejection fraction (57%) and had a history of coronary artery disease (68%). The 1-month and 6-month HF-related hospitalization did not differ between the torsemide and optimized furosemide groups (aHR = 0.72; 95% CI 0.23-2.3, p = 0.57; aHR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.45-1.8, p = 0.87), respectively. CONCLUSION: Switching furosemide to torsemide after ADHF was not associated with reduced HF-related hospitalization compared to receiving an optimized furosemide dose. Larger prospective clinical trials are needed to confirm the findings of this study.

Blood glucose control for patients with acute coronary syndromes in Qatar.

BACKGROUND: Blood glucose is known to be elevated in patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes. However a gap in knowledge exists regarding effective management strategies once admitted to acute care units. It is also unknown what factors (if any) predict elevated glucose values during initial presentation. OBJECTIVES: OBJECTIVES of the study were to characterize blood glucose control in patients admitted to the cardiac care unit (CCU) in Qatar and to determine predictive factors associated with high glucose levels (>10 mmol/l) on admission to the CCU. SETTING: All data for this study were obtained from the CCU at Heart Hospital in Doha, Qatar. METHOD: A retrospective chart review was completed for patients admitted to the CCU in Qatar from October 1st, 2012 to March 31st, 2013, of which 283 were included. Baseline characteristics (age, gender, nationality, medical history, smoking status, type of acute coronary syndrome), capillary and lab blood glucose measurements, and use of insulin were extracted. Time spent in glucose ranges of <4, 4 to <8, 8 to <10, and >10 mmol/1 was calculated manually. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were performed to assess factors associated with high glucose on admission. The primary analysis was completed with capillary data and a sensitivity analysis was completed using laboratory data. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Blood glucose values measured on admission and throughout length of stay in the CCU. RESULTS: Capillary blood glucose data showed majority of time was spent in the range of >10 mmol/l (41.95%), followed by 4-8 mmol/l (35.44%), then 8-10 mmol/l (21.45%), and finally <4 mmol/l (1.16%). As a sensitivity analysis, laboratory data showed very similar findings. Diabetes, hypertension, and non-smoker status predicted glucose values >10 mmol/l on admission (p < 0.05) in a univariate analysis but only diabetes remained significant in a multivariate model (OR 23.3; 95% CI, 11.5-47.3). CONCLUSION: Diabetes predicts high glucose values on hospital admission for patients with ACS and patients are not being adequately controlled throughout CCU stay.

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.