ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2018
Aspirin Use and Cardiovascular Outcome in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Heart Failure: A Population-Based Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reshaping care in the aftermath of the pandemic. Implications for cardiology health systems.European journal of internal medicine · 2023Review
- Article
- Survival Benefit of Aspirin in Patients With Congestive Heart Failure: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine research · 2021Article
- Therapeutic effects of interleukin-1 receptor-associated kinase 4 inhibitor AS2444697 on diabetic nephropathy in type 2 diabetic mice.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2020Article
- Aspirin Use and Cardiovascular Outcome in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Heart Failure: A Population-Based Cohort Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Aspirin is of uncertain benefit for primary prevention in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D). We assessed whether primary prevention with aspirin is beneficial in patients with T2D and heart failure ( HF ). Methods and Results Data from The Health Improvement Network, a UK multicenter prospective primary care database, were analyzed. Those with T2D and HF , age ≥55 years, and no previous history of myocardial infarction and/or coronary artery disease, stroke, peripheral artery disease, or atrial fibrillation were included. We compared outcomes for those on aspirin to no aspirin after diagnosis of HF and T2D and assessed the role of a >75-mg dose. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality and hospitalization for HF ; secondary outcomes were nonfatal stroke, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or major bleeding. There were 5967 participants on aspirin and 6567 not on aspirin. The mean age ( SD ) was 75.3 (9.6) years, 53.9% were men, and the mean follow-up ( SD ) was for 5 (4.2) years. After propensity-score matching and further multivariable adjustment, aspirin was significantly associated with a decrease in the primary outcome and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio=0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.82-0.93; 0.88, 0.83-0.94], respectively); and an increased risk of nonfatal myocardial infarction (hazard ratio=1.66; 95% confidence interval 1.49-1.85) and nonfatal stroke (hazard ratio=1.23, 1.01-1.50). Major bleedings and hospitalization for HF were not significantly higher with aspirin (hazard ratio=0.68, 0.45-1.03; 0.87, 0.66-1.15, respectively). There was no additional benefit for a dose >75 mg. Conclusions Primary prevention with aspirin in patients with T2D and HF is associated with lower all-cause mortality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.