Thursday, October 3, 2013

FICF Powered by Nucleus


The results of a retrospective analysis of the trial clnico HPS (Heart Protection Study) do not support the hypothesis that the basal protena C reactive protein (CRP) modify the efficacy of statin therapy (Lancet 2011; 377:469-76). In the HPS trial 20,536 adults 40-80 years at high cardiovascular risk were randomized to receive simvastatin 40 mg to harm either placebo (Lancet 2002; 360:7-22). After a follow-up of 5 years, simvastatin treatment was asso to a 24% reduction of the risk of a combined end point of coronary death, myocardial infarction, stroke or revascularizacin. In the study it was observed that this is independent of disminucin baseline CRP concentrations, and even in patients with baseline CRP concentrations ms low (<1.25 mg / L) simvastatin treatment reduced risk by 29%. According to the authors, the effectiveness of statins may be largely explained by the effect on LDL, and reductions in LDL and CRP levels observed are of similar magnitude to those described cancer de piel in the test rosuvastatin JUPITER. cancer de piel Also note that the large sample size and the wide range of baseline levels of LDL and CRP give strength to the findings. The role of CRP as a cardiovascular risk marker that should cancer de piel be considered to guide the practice is debated. In a recent newsletter JUPITER trial with rosuvastatin in primary prevention is considered not justified its use as a marker of cardiovascular risk, given their limited predictive value. In addition, the study early interruption overestimates its results and must not modify the practice in primary prevention (Bit Navarra 2010; 18:63-72). In a systematic review of all test results clnicos with statins in primary prevention cardiovascular concludes without a net beneficial effect shown (Initiative Ther 2010; 77:1-5). According to the editorial, these results provide more controversy to the debate, and we do not know whether CRP be a bright star or a dim light in the galaxy of cardiovascular risk markers (Lancet 2011, 377:441 - 42). Tweet
FICF Powered by Nucleus

No comments:

Post a Comment