Suppr超能文献

慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者吸入长效支气管扩张剂的心血管和脑血管安全性比较:一项基于人群的队列研究。

Comparative Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Safety of Inhaled Long-Acting Bronchodilators in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

作者信息

Dong Yaa-Hui, Chang Chia-Hsuin, Gagne Joshua J, Hsu Chia-Lin, Lai Mei-Shu

机构信息

Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

Center of Comparative Effectiveness Research, National Center of Excellence for Clinical Trial and Research, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.

出版信息

Pharmacotherapy. 2016 Jan;36(1):26-37. doi: 10.1002/phar.1684.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Inhaled long-acting bronchodilators are commonly used as maintenance therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). We compared the risk of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events among patients with COPD treated with inhaled long-acting bronchodilator monotherapy and combination therapy.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

A population-based health care database from Taiwan.

PATIENTS

Individuals with COPD who initiated long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs) alone, long-acting β-2 agonists (LABA) alone, and LABA and LAMA in combination between 2001 and 2010.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

We used Cox regression models to compare a composite cardiovascular outcome, defined as hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and cerebrovascular diseases among the three treatment groups, adjusting for potential confounders. Among a cohort of 3458 study-eligible patients, we identified 505 composite cardiovascular events during 10,590 patient-years of follow-up. In the primary analysis which considered first exposure carried forward, LABA alone and LAMA alone were associated with similar risks of the composite outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-1.37). The HR comparing LABA and LAMA in combination with LAMA alone was 1.13 (95% CI 0.60-2.13) and to LABA alone was 1.03 (95% CI 0.55-1.92). The secondary analysis in which we allowed patients to reenter the cohort upon treatment change yielded similar results, but with slightly higher HRs comparing LABA and LAMA in combination with LAMA alone (HR 1.26, 95% CI 0.74-2.15) and to LABA alone (HR 1.31, 95% CI 0.80-2.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest similar cardiovascular and cerebrovascular safety of LABA and LAMA when agents are used alone. Additional studies are needed to rule out potential risk associated with inhaled long-acting bronchodilator combination therapy.

摘要

研究目的

吸入长效支气管扩张剂常用于慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)的维持治疗。我们比较了接受吸入长效支气管扩张剂单一疗法和联合疗法的COPD患者发生心血管和脑血管事件的风险。

设计

回顾性队列研究。

研究地点

来自台湾的基于人群的医疗保健数据库。

患者

2001年至2010年间开始单独使用长效毒蕈碱拮抗剂(LAMA)、单独使用长效β-2激动剂(LABA)以及联合使用LABA和LAMA的COPD患者。

测量指标及主要结果

我们使用Cox回归模型比较了三种治疗组中定义为急性心肌梗死、充血性心力衰竭和脑血管疾病住院治疗的复合心血管结局,并对潜在混杂因素进行了调整。在3458名符合研究条件的患者队列中,我们在10590患者年的随访期间确定了505例复合心血管事件。在考虑首次暴露并向前推进的初步分析中,单独使用LABA和单独使用LAMA与复合结局的风险相似(风险比[HR]1.09;95%置信区间[CI]0.87-1.37)。联合使用LABA和LAMA与单独使用LAMA相比的HR为1.13(95%CI 0.60-2.13),与单独使用LABA相比的HR为1.03(95%CI 0.55-1.92)。在允许患者在治疗改变时重新进入队列的二次分析中,结果相似,但联合使用LABA和LAMA与单独使用LAMA相比的HR略高(HR 1.26,95%CI 0.74-2.15),与单独使用LABA相比的HR为1.31(95%CI 0.80-2.13)。

结论

我们的结果表明,单独使用LABA和LAMA时,心血管和脑血管安全性相似。需要进一步研究以排除吸入长效支气管扩张剂联合疗法相关的潜在风险。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验