Setor K Kunutsor1, Samuel Seidu2, Kamlesh Khunti2. 1. School of Clinical Sciences, University of Bristol, Southmead Hospital, Bristol, UK. Electronic address: skk31@cantab.net. 2. Leicester Diabetes Centre, and Diabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Statins have been suggested to have a protective effect on venous thromboembolism (which includes deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism), but the evidence is uncertain. We sought to evaluate the extent to which statins are associated with first venous thromboembolism events. METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational cohort studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Relevant studies that reported associations between statins and first venous thromboembolism outcomes were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and a manual search of bibliographies for studies published up until July 18, 2016, and from email correspondence with investigators. Observational cohorts that assessed the association of statin use with venous thromboembolism, deep vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism in adults were included, as were intervention studies that assessed the effects of statin therapy compared with a placebo or no treatment and collected data on venous thromboembolism, deep vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism outcomes. Studies that compared statins with another statin or lipid-lowering agent were excluded. Study specific relative risks (RRs) were aggregated using random-effects models and were grouped by study-level characteristics. The review has been registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016035622. FINDINGS: 36 eligible studies (13 cohort studies comprising 3 148 259 participants and 23 RCTs of statins vs placebo or no treatment comprising 118 464 participants) were included. In observational studies, the pooled RR for venous thromboembolism was 0·75 (95% CI 0·65-0·87; p<0·0001) when statin use was compared with no statin use. This association remained consistent when grouped by various study-level characteristics. In RCTs, the RR for venous thromboembolism was 0·85 (0·73-0·99; p=0·038) when statin therapy was compared with placebo or no treatment. Subgroup analyses suggested significant differences in the effect of statins by type of statin, with rosuvastatin having the lowest risk on venous thromboembolism compared with other statins 0·57 (0·42-0·75; p=0·015). There was no evidence of an effect of statin use on pulmonary embolism. Statin use was associated with a significant reduction in risk of the specific endpoint of deep vein thrombosis compared with no statin use (RR 0·77, 95% CI 0·69-0·86; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Available evidence from observational and intervention studies suggest a beneficial effect of statin use on venous thromboembolism. In intervention studies, therapy with rosuvastatin significantly reduced venous thromboembolism compared with other statins. Further evidence is however needed to validate these findings. FUNDING: None.
BACKGROUND: Statins have been suggested to have a protective effect on venous thromboembolism (which includes deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism), but the evidence is uncertain. We sought to evaluate the extent to which statins are associated with first venous thromboembolism events. METHODS: We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational cohort studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Relevant studies that reported associations between statins and first venous thromboembolism outcomes were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and a manual search of bibliographies for studies published up until July 18, 2016, and from email correspondence with investigators. Observational cohorts that assessed the association of statin use with venous thromboembolism, deep vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism in adults were included, as were intervention studies that assessed the effects of statin therapy compared with a placebo or no treatment and collected data on venous thromboembolism, deep vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism outcomes. Studies that compared statins with another statin or lipid-lowering agent were excluded. Study specific relative risks (RRs) were aggregated using random-effects models and were grouped by study-level characteristics. The review has been registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016035622. FINDINGS: 36 eligible studies (13 cohort studies comprising 3 148 259 participants and 23 RCTs of statins vs placebo or no treatment comprising 118 464 participants) were included. In observational studies, the pooled RR for venous thromboembolism was 0·75 (95% CI 0·65-0·87; p<0·0001) when statin use was compared with no statin use. This association remained consistent when grouped by various study-level characteristics. In RCTs, the RR for venous thromboembolism was 0·85 (0·73-0·99; p=0·038) when statin therapy was compared with placebo or no treatment. Subgroup analyses suggested significant differences in the effect of statins by type of statin, with rosuvastatin having the lowest risk on venous thromboembolism compared with other statins 0·57 (0·42-0·75; p=0·015). There was no evidence of an effect of statin use on pulmonary embolism. Statin use was associated with a significant reduction in risk of the specific endpoint of deep vein thrombosis compared with no statin use (RR 0·77, 95% CI 0·69-0·86; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Available evidence from observational and intervention studies suggest a beneficial effect of statin use on venous thromboembolism. In intervention studies, therapy with rosuvastatin significantly reduced venous thromboembolism compared with other statins. Further evidence is however needed to validate these findings. FUNDING: None.
Authors: K L Cheung; N A Zakai; P W Callas; G Howard; B K Mahmoodi; C A Peralta; S E Judd; M Kurella Tamura; M Cushman Journal: J Thromb Haemost Date: 2018-08-09 Impact factor: 5.824
Authors: Christian T Ruff; Marc S Sabatine; Nicholas A Marston; Yared Gurmu; Giorgio E M Melloni; Marc Bonaca; Baris Gencer; Peter S Sever; Terje R Pedersen; Anthony C Keech; Carolina Roselli; Steven A Lubitz; Patrick T Ellinor; Michelle L O'Donoghue; Robert P Giugliano Journal: Circulation Date: 2020-03-29 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Philip Joseph; Robert Glynn; Eva Lonn; Chinthanie Ramasundarahettige; John Eikelboom; Jean MacFadyen; Paul Ridker; Salim Yusuf Journal: Cardiovasc Res Date: 2022-02-21 Impact factor: 10.787
Authors: Setor K Kunutsor; Samuel Seidu; Ashley W Blom; Kamlesh Khunti; Jari A Laukkanen Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2017-07-17 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: Geert Byttebier; Luc Belmans; Myriam Alexander; Bo E H Saxberg; Bart De Spiegeleer; Anton De Spiegeleer; Nick Devreker; Jens T Van Praet; Karolien Vanhove; Reinhilde Reybrouck; Evelien Wynendaele; David S Fedson Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2021-05-28 Impact factor: 3.452