Evidence Hub

Population-based study of event-rate, incidence, case fatality, and mortality for all acute vascular events in all arterial territories (Oxford Vascular Study)

Rothwell PM, Coull AJ, Silver LE, Fairhead JF, Giles MF, Lovelock CE, Redgrave JN, Bull LM et al.

Lancet (London, England), 2005

1,657 participants

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Acute coronary, cerebrovascular, and peripheral vascular events have common underlying arterial pathology, risk factors, and preventive treatments, but they are rarely studied concurrently. In the Oxford Vascular Study, we determined the comparative epidemiology of different acute vascular syndromes, their current burdens, and the potential effect of the ageing population on future rates.

METHODS: We prospectively assessed all individuals presenting with an acute vascular event of any type in any arterial territory irrespective of age in a population of 91 106 in Oxfordshire, UK, in 2002-05.

FINDINGS: 2024 acute vascular events occurred in 1657 individuals: 918 (45%) cerebrovascular (618 stroke, 300 transient ischaemic attacks [TIA]); 856 (42%) coronary vascular (159 ST-elevation myocardial infarction, 316 non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, 218 unstable angina, 163 sudden cardiac death); 188 (9%) peripheral vascular (43 aortic, 53 embolic visceral or limb ischaemia, 92 critical limb ischaemia); and 62 unclassifiable deaths. Relative incidence of cerebrovascular events compared with coronary events was 1.19 (95% CI 1.06-1.33) overall; 1.40 (1.23-1.59) for non-fatal events; and 1.21 (1.04-1.41) if TIA and unstable angina were further excluded. Event and incidence rates rose steeply with age in all arterial territories, with 735 (80%) cerebrovascular, 623 (73%) coronary, and 147 (78%) peripheral vascular events in 12 886 (14%) individuals aged 65 years or…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,657 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free