Posttraumatic stress disorder in first-time myocardial infarction patients

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to investigate the prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder in patients with a first myocardial infarction compared with a random sample of healthy controls and to determine variables associated with the disorder. DESIGN: A questionnaire was distributed to 112 consecutive patients 4 to 6 weeks after infarction and to 115 healthy controls selected randomly from the general population. Objective clinical measures were obtained from the patients' medical records. RESULTS: Twenty-five (22%) patients qualified for a diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) compared with 8 (7%) controls with patients being more than a three-fold (OR: 3.84; 95% CI: 1.65 to 8.94) risk of having the disorder. When adjusting for other variables, the risk was reduced to above a two-fold risk (OR: 2.71; 95% CI: 0.99-7.41). In patients and controls, depression and neuroticism were associated with a diagnosis of PTSD adjusting for other variables. In patients, anxiety was associated with a diagnosis of PTSD adjusting for other variables. Left ventricular ejection fraction and symptoms of angina pectoris were not related to a diagnosis of PTSD in the patient group. CONCLUSIONS: Given that previous research has shown that persons with PTSD are at increased risk of cardiovascular diseases, cardiac patients with the disorder may be at a higher risk of recurrent cardiac events. Although longitudinal studies are needed to confirm such a relationship, this disorder should not be overlooked because of its potential role in reinfarctions and mortality.     

The role of personality variables and social support in distress and perceived health in patients following myocardial infarction

Objectives: (1) To investigate whether patients with low versus high social support and satisfaction with support report less distress and health complaints following a first myocardial infarction (MI). (2) To examine whether personality traits mediate social support and its effect on distress and health complaints. Methods: A questionnaire was distributed to 112 consecutive patients with a first MI 4–6 weeks postinfarction. Objective clinical measures were obtained from the patients' medical records. Results: Patients with low social support were at increased risk of depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Patients less satisfied with support were at increased risk of anxiety, depression, PTSD, and reported more health complaints. Generally, larger effect sizes were found for satisfaction with support compared with social support per se in relation to distress and health complaints. Neuroticism was identified as an independent predictor of all types of distress and health complaints when including both traits and social support variables in multivariable analyses, adjusted for demographic and clinical variables. Satisfaction with support only remained an independent predictor of depression. Conclusion: These results suggest that personality traits may mediate social support and its effect on distress and health complaints. Hence, it may be important to include personality variables when investigating social support in relation to distress and health. In clinical practice, screening for particular personality traits could identify patients at risk of distress and recurrent cardiac events.     

High-dose atorvastatin vs usual-dose simvastatin for secondary prevention after myocardial infarction: the IDEAL study: a randomized controlled trial

Context  Evidence suggests that more intensive lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) than is commonly applied clinically will provide further benefit in stable coronary artery disease. Objective  To compare the effects of 2 strategies of lipid lowering on the risk of cardiovascular disease among patients with a previous myocardial infarction (MI). Design, Setting, and Participants  The IDEAL study, a prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded end-point evaluation trial conducted at 190 ambulatory cardiology care and specialist practices in northern Europe between March 1999 and March 2005 with a median follow-up of 4.8 years, which enrolled 8888 patients aged 80 years or younger with a history of acute MI. Interventions  Patients were randomly assigned to receive a high dose of atorvastatin (80 mg/d; n = 4439), or usual-dose simvastatin (20 mg/d; n = 4449). Main Outcome Measure  Occurrence of a major coronary event, defined as coronary death, confirmed nonfatal acute MI, or cardiac arrest with resuscitation. Results  During treatment, mean LDL-C levels were 104 (SE, 0.3) mg/dL in the simvastatin group and 81 (SE, 0.3) mg/dL in the atorvastatin group. A major coronary event occurred in 463 simvastatin patients (10.4%) and in 411 atorvastatin patients (9.3%) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.78-1.01; P = .07). Nonfatal acute MI occurred in 321 (7.2%) and 267 (6.0%) in the 2 groups (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71-0.98; P = .02), but no differences were seen in the 2 other components of the primary end point. Major cardiovascular events occurred in 608 and 533 in the 2 groups, respectively (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.77-0.98; P = .02). Occurrence of any coronary event was reported in 1059 simvastatin and 898 atorvastatin patients (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76-0.91; P<.001). Noncardiovascular death occurred in 156 (3.5%) and 143 (3.2%) in the 2 groups (HR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.73-1.15; P = .47). Death from any cause occurred in 374 (8.4%) in the simvastatin group and 366 (8.2%) in the atorvastatin group (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.85-1.13; P = .81). Patients in the atorvastatin group had higher rates of drug discontinuation due to nonserious adverse events; transaminase elevation resulted in 43 (1.0%) vs 5 (0.1%) withdrawals (P<.001). Serious myopathy and rhabdomyolysis were rare in both groups. Conclusions  In this study of patients with previous MI, intensive lowering of LDL-C did not result in a significant reduction in the primary outcome of major coronary events, but did reduce the risk of other composite secondary end points and nonfatal acute MI. There were no differences in cardiovascular or all-cause mortality. Patients with MI may benefit from intensive lowering of LDL-C without an increase in noncardiovascular mortality or other serious adverse reactions. Trial Registration  ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00159835.      

Social inequality and barriers to cardiac rehabilitation in the rehab-North register

Aim. Barriers to participation in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) may occur at three levels of the referral process (lack of information, declining to participate, and referral to appropriate CR programme). The aim is to analyse the impact of socioeconomic status on barriers to CR and investigate whether such barriers influenced the choice of referral. Methods. The Rehab-North Register, a cross-sectional study, enrolled 5455 patients hospitalised at Aalborg University Hospital with myocardial infarction (MI) during 2011-2014. Patients hospitalised with ST-elevated MI and complicated non-ST-elevated MI were to be sent to specialized CR, whereas patients with uncomplicated non-ST-elevated MI and unstable angina pectoris were to be sent to community-based CR. Detailed selected socioeconomic information was gathered from statistical registries in Statistics Denmark. Data was assessed using logistic regression. Results. Patients being retired, low educated, and/or with an annual gross income <27.000?Euro/yr were significantly less informed about cardiac rehabilitation programmes. Patients being older than 70 years, retired, low educated and/or with an annual gross income <27.000?Euro were significantly less willing to participate in CR. Further, this patient population were to a higher extent referred to community-based CR. Conclusion. Patients with low socioeconomic status received less information about and were less willing to participate in cardiac rehabilitation. The same patient population was to a higher extent referred to community-based CR. Knowledge about barriers at different levels and the impact of social inequality may help in tailoring a better approach in the referral process to CR.     

Effects of simvastatin on bone turnover and BMD: a 1-year randomized controlled trial in postmenopausal osteopenic women.

To study effects of statins on human bone, 82 postmenopausal women were randomized to 1-year treatment with simvastatin 40 mg/day or placebo. The study showed no effect of simvastatin on biochemical bone markers or on BMD at the hip or spine. Thus, our results do not support a general beneficial effect of simvastatin on bone. INTRODUCTION: Statins have been reported to cause bone anabolic as well as antiresorptive effects, and therefore statins have been suggested as potential agents in treatment of osteoporosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In a double-blinded design, 82 healthy postmenopausal women with osteopenia were randomized to 1-year simvastatin treatment 40 mg/day or placebo. BMD and plasma levels of cholesterol, parathyroid hormone (PTH), and biochemical bone markers were measured at baseline, after 1 year of treatment (week 52), and 26 weeks after withdrawal of treatment (week 78). Calcium supplements (400 mg/day) were administrated during the entire 1.5-year study period. RESULTS: Seventy-eight women completed the 1-year treatment. After 1 year, simvastatin but not placebo caused reduced plasma cholesterol (-27% versus +1%, p < 0.001) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels (-43% versus +1%, p < 0.001). After withdrawal of treatment, cholesterol and LDL levels returned to baseline levels and no longer differed from the placebo group. However, plasma levels of PTH and biochemical bone markers did not differ between groups at week 52 or 78. Compared with placebo, simvastatin caused no changes in BMD at the lumbar spine, total hip, femoral neck, or whole body at week 52 or 78. However, a significant increase in BMD was found in response to simvastatin at the forearm. Within the simvastatin group, changes in cholesterol levels did not correlate to BMD changes at any site. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support a general beneficial effect of simvastatin on bone.