Wilson, Peter W.F.

Background: Statin dose guidelines for patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) are largely based on coronary artery disease and stroke data. The aim of this study is to determine the effect of statin intensity on PAD outcomes of amputation and mortality. Methods: Using an observational cohort study design and a validated algorithm, we identified patients with incident PAD (2003–2014) in the national Veterans Affairs data. Highest statin intensity exposure (high-intensity versus low-to-moderate–intensity versus antiplatelet therapy but no statin use) was determined within 1 year of diagnosis of PAD. Outcomes of interest were lower extremity amputations and death. The association of statin intensity with incident amputation and mortality was assessed with Kaplan-Meier plots, Cox proportional hazards modeling, propensity score–matched analysis, and sensitivity and subgroup analyses, as well, to reduce confounding. Results: In 155 647 patients with incident PAD, more than a quarter (28%) were not on statins. Use of high-intensity statins was lowest in patients with PAD only (6.4%) in comparison with comorbid coronary/carotid disease (18.4%). Incident amputation and mortality risk declined significantly with any statin use in comparison with the antiplatelet therapy–only group. In adjusted Cox models, the high-intensity statin users were associated with lower amputation risk and mortality in comparison with antiplatelet therapy–only users (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.61–0.74 and hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.70–0.77, respectively). Low-to-moderate–intensity statins also had significant reductions in the risk of amputation and mortality (hazard ratio amputation, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.75– 0.86; hazard ratio death, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.81–0.86) in comparison with no statins (antiplatelet therapy only), but effect size was significantly weaker than the high-intensity statins ( P <0.001). The association of high-intensity statins with lower amputation and death risk remained significant and robust in propensity score–matched, sensitivity, and subgroup analyses. Conclusions: Statins, especially high-intensity formulations, are underused in patients with PAD. This is the first population-based study to show that high-intensity statin use at the time of PAD diagnosis is associated with a significant reduction in limb loss and mortality in comparison with low-to-moderate–intensity statin users, and patients treated only with antiplatelet medications but not with statins, as well.

Background— Studies report a protective effect of higher attained educational level (AEL) on cardiovascular outcomes. However, most of these studies have been conducted in high-income countries (HICs) and lack representation from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), which bear >80% of the global burden of cardiovascular disease. Methods and Results— The Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) Registry is a prospective study of 67 888 subjects with either established atherothrombotic (coronary, cerebrovascular, and/or peripheral arterial) disease or multiple atherothrombotic risk factors enrolled from 5587 physician practices in 44 countries. At baseline, AEL (0 to 8 years, 9 to 12 years, trade or technical school, and university) was self-reported for 61 332 subjects. Outcomes included the baseline prevalence of atherothrombotic risk factors and the rate of incident cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) through 23 months across AEL groups, stratified by sex and world region (LMICs or HICs). Educational attainment was inversely associated with age and diabetes mellitus and directly associated with hypercholesterolemia in all subjects. However, for other risk factors such as obesity, smoking, hypertension, and baseline burden of vascular disease, AEL was protective (inversely associated) in HICs but not protective in LMICs. The protective effect of greater AEL on incident cardiovascular events was strongest in men from HICs ( P <0.0001), more modest in women from HICs ( P =0.0026) and in men from LMICs ( P =0.082), and essentially absent in women from LMICs ( P =0.32). Conclusion— In contrast to HICs, higher AEL may not be protective against cardiovascular events in LMICs, particularly in women.