冠状动脉搭桥后他汀类药物强度观察研究评论

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Murat Abdulhamit Ercişli, Ahmet Süsenbük
{"title":"冠状动脉搭桥后他汀类药物强度观察研究评论","authors":"Murat Abdulhamit Ercişli,&nbsp;Ahmet Süsenbük","doi":"10.1002/clc.70198","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We read with interest the article titled “Effect of Statin Intensity on Cardiovascular Outcomes and Survival Following Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting” recently published in Clinical Cardiology [<span>1</span>]. The study addresses a crucial area concerning optimal lipid management in patients undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG), particularly the impact of statin intensity on long-term cardiovascular outcomes.</p><p>While we commend the authors for conducting this relevant and timely observational study, we would like to raise several points for clarification and discussion, which might significantly impact the interpretation of the results:</p><p>First, we note considerable discrepancies in patient numbers between the comparison groups: No-statin (156 patients), low/moderate-intensity statin (1301 patients), and high-intensity statin (397 patients). Although the authors acknowledged this statistical concern due to the observational study design, such imbalanced group sizes may inherently introduce bias and confounding, limiting the reliability and generalizability of the conclusions.</p><p>Second, the authors mentioned that older patients and women were less likely to receive statins or were prescribed lower-intensity statins. This finding raises concerns regarding potential selection bias or disparities in clinical practice. It would be helpful for the authors to elaborate further on possible reasons for these discrepancies and their potential influence on clinical outcomes.</p><p>Third, the study did not adequately track patient compliance or continued usage of statins over the follow-up period, which is pivotal to understanding the true impact of the medication. Given that statin adherence significantly influences clinical outcomes, this limitation might have considerably affected the study's conclusions.</p><p>Additionally, the authors defined Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) broadly to include acute coronary syndrome (ACS), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), and cardiovascular mortality. However, the study did not consider graft occlusion rates directly, which could significantly affect revascularization rates and subsequent MACE. Including graft occlusion data might have provided additional critical insights into statin efficacy.</p><p>Lastly, the timing of lipid measurements, which were taken variably between 1 and 3 months postoperatively, could introduce measurement bias. This variability in follow-up LDL measurements might limit the robustness of the conclusions drawn about the efficacy of lipid management.</p><p>Despite these concerns, the findings strongly suggest potential long-term benefits associated with high-intensity statin therapy in reducing cardiovascular risks post-CABG, especially evident beyond 2 years. This underscores the importance of robust randomized controlled trials to conclusively establish the most effective lipid-lowering strategies in post-CABG patients.</p><p>We appreciate the authors' efforts in highlighting this critical issue and look forward to further research addressing these areas of concern.</p>","PeriodicalId":10201,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Cardiology","volume":"48 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/clc.70198","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comments on the Observational Study on Statin Intensity Following CABG\",\"authors\":\"Murat Abdulhamit Ercişli,&nbsp;Ahmet Süsenbük\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/clc.70198\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>We read with interest the article titled “Effect of Statin Intensity on Cardiovascular Outcomes and Survival Following Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting” recently published in Clinical Cardiology [<span>1</span>]. The study addresses a crucial area concerning optimal lipid management in patients undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG), particularly the impact of statin intensity on long-term cardiovascular outcomes.</p><p>While we commend the authors for conducting this relevant and timely observational study, we would like to raise several points for clarification and discussion, which might significantly impact the interpretation of the results:</p><p>First, we note considerable discrepancies in patient numbers between the comparison groups: No-statin (156 patients), low/moderate-intensity statin (1301 patients), and high-intensity statin (397 patients). Although the authors acknowledged this statistical concern due to the observational study design, such imbalanced group sizes may inherently introduce bias and confounding, limiting the reliability and generalizability of the conclusions.</p><p>Second, the authors mentioned that older patients and women were less likely to receive statins or were prescribed lower-intensity statins. This finding raises concerns regarding potential selection bias or disparities in clinical practice. It would be helpful for the authors to elaborate further on possible reasons for these discrepancies and their potential influence on clinical outcomes.</p><p>Third, the study did not adequately track patient compliance or continued usage of statins over the follow-up period, which is pivotal to understanding the true impact of the medication. Given that statin adherence significantly influences clinical outcomes, this limitation might have considerably affected the study's conclusions.</p><p>Additionally, the authors defined Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) broadly to include acute coronary syndrome (ACS), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), and cardiovascular mortality. However, the study did not consider graft occlusion rates directly, which could significantly affect revascularization rates and subsequent MACE. Including graft occlusion data might have provided additional critical insights into statin efficacy.</p><p>Lastly, the timing of lipid measurements, which were taken variably between 1 and 3 months postoperatively, could introduce measurement bias. This variability in follow-up LDL measurements might limit the robustness of the conclusions drawn about the efficacy of lipid management.</p><p>Despite these concerns, the findings strongly suggest potential long-term benefits associated with high-intensity statin therapy in reducing cardiovascular risks post-CABG, especially evident beyond 2 years. This underscores the importance of robust randomized controlled trials to conclusively establish the most effective lipid-lowering strategies in post-CABG patients.</p><p>We appreciate the authors' efforts in highlighting this critical issue and look forward to further research addressing these areas of concern.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10201,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Cardiology\",\"volume\":\"48 9\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/clc.70198\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/clc.70198\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/clc.70198","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们饶有兴趣地阅读了最近发表在《临床心脏病学b[1]》上的一篇题为“他汀类药物强度对冠状动脉搭桥术后心血管结局和生存的影响”的文章。该研究解决了冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)患者最佳脂质管理的关键领域,特别是他汀类药物强度对长期心血管预后的影响。虽然我们赞扬作者进行了这项相关且及时的观察性研究,但我们想提出几点澄清和讨论,这可能会对结果的解释产生重大影响:首先,我们注意到对照组之间患者数量的显著差异:无他汀类药物(156例),低/中等强度他汀类药物(1301例)和高强度他汀类药物(397例)。尽管作者承认由于观察性研究设计,这种不平衡的群体规模可能固有地引入偏倚和混淆,限制了结论的可靠性和可推广性。其次,作者提到,老年患者和女性接受他汀类药物治疗或服用低强度他汀类药物的可能性较小。这一发现引起了人们对临床实践中潜在的选择偏差或差异的关注。这将有助于作者进一步阐述这些差异的可能原因及其对临床结果的潜在影响。第三,该研究没有充分跟踪患者的依从性或在随访期间继续使用他汀类药物,这对了解药物的真正影响至关重要。考虑到他汀类药物的依从性显著影响临床结果,这一限制可能在很大程度上影响了研究的结论。此外,作者将主要心血管不良事件(MACE)广义地定义为包括急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)、脑血管意外(CVA)和心血管死亡。然而,该研究没有直接考虑移植物闭塞率,这可能会显著影响血运重建率和随后的MACE。包括移植物闭塞数据可能为他汀类药物的疗效提供了额外的关键见解。最后,脂质测量的时间在术后1至3个月不等,可能会导致测量偏差。这种随访LDL测量的可变性可能会限制脂质管理有效性结论的稳健性。尽管存在这些担忧,但研究结果强烈表明,高强度他汀类药物治疗在降低冠脉搭桥后心血管风险方面具有潜在的长期益处,特别是在2年以上。这强调了可靠的随机对照试验对于最终确定cabg后患者最有效的降脂策略的重要性。我们感谢作者在强调这一关键问题上所做的努力,并期待进一步的研究解决这些关注的领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comments on the Observational Study on Statin Intensity Following CABG

We read with interest the article titled “Effect of Statin Intensity on Cardiovascular Outcomes and Survival Following Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting” recently published in Clinical Cardiology [1]. The study addresses a crucial area concerning optimal lipid management in patients undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG), particularly the impact of statin intensity on long-term cardiovascular outcomes.

While we commend the authors for conducting this relevant and timely observational study, we would like to raise several points for clarification and discussion, which might significantly impact the interpretation of the results:

First, we note considerable discrepancies in patient numbers between the comparison groups: No-statin (156 patients), low/moderate-intensity statin (1301 patients), and high-intensity statin (397 patients). Although the authors acknowledged this statistical concern due to the observational study design, such imbalanced group sizes may inherently introduce bias and confounding, limiting the reliability and generalizability of the conclusions.

Second, the authors mentioned that older patients and women were less likely to receive statins or were prescribed lower-intensity statins. This finding raises concerns regarding potential selection bias or disparities in clinical practice. It would be helpful for the authors to elaborate further on possible reasons for these discrepancies and their potential influence on clinical outcomes.

Third, the study did not adequately track patient compliance or continued usage of statins over the follow-up period, which is pivotal to understanding the true impact of the medication. Given that statin adherence significantly influences clinical outcomes, this limitation might have considerably affected the study's conclusions.

Additionally, the authors defined Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) broadly to include acute coronary syndrome (ACS), cerebrovascular accident (CVA), and cardiovascular mortality. However, the study did not consider graft occlusion rates directly, which could significantly affect revascularization rates and subsequent MACE. Including graft occlusion data might have provided additional critical insights into statin efficacy.

Lastly, the timing of lipid measurements, which were taken variably between 1 and 3 months postoperatively, could introduce measurement bias. This variability in follow-up LDL measurements might limit the robustness of the conclusions drawn about the efficacy of lipid management.

Despite these concerns, the findings strongly suggest potential long-term benefits associated with high-intensity statin therapy in reducing cardiovascular risks post-CABG, especially evident beyond 2 years. This underscores the importance of robust randomized controlled trials to conclusively establish the most effective lipid-lowering strategies in post-CABG patients.

We appreciate the authors' efforts in highlighting this critical issue and look forward to further research addressing these areas of concern.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Cardiology
Clinical Cardiology 医学-心血管系统
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.70%
发文量
189
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Cardiology provides a fully Gold Open Access forum for the publication of original clinical research, as well as brief reviews of diagnostic and therapeutic issues in cardiovascular medicine and cardiovascular surgery. The journal includes Clinical Investigations, Reviews, free standing editorials and commentaries, and bonus online-only content. The journal also publishes supplements, Expert Panel Discussions, sponsored clinical Reviews, Trial Designs, and Quality and Outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信