Evidence Hub

Increase in creatinine and cardiovascular risk in patients with systolic dysfunction after myocardial infarction

Jose P, Skali H, Anavekar N, Tomson C, Krumholz HM, Rouleau JL, Moye L, Pfeffer MA et al.

Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN, 2006

2,231 participants

Abstract

Baseline renal function is a potent independent risk factor for adverse events after acute myocardial infarction (MI). Worsening renal function (WRF) has been shown to influence outcomes in the heart failure population, but its impact on cardiovascular risk in the post-MI period has not been well defined. For assessment of the prognostic importance of WRF, 2231 patients who had left ventricular dysfunction and were enrolled in the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement (SAVE) trial were studied. Patients were randomly assigned between 3 and 16 d (average 11 d) after acute MI to receive captopril or placebo; those with a serum creatinine of >2.5 mg/dl were excluded from SAVE. WRF was defined as an increase in creatinine of >0.3 mg/dl measured from baseline to 2 wk after randomization. The predictive value of WRF on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality was examined during 42 mo of follow-up. Paired serum creatinine measurements at baseline and 2 wk were available in 1854 patients. WRF occurred in 223 (12.0%) patients and was a stronger predictor of death (hazard ratio [HR] 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.05 to 2.02) than baseline creatinine (HR 1.31; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.70). WRF also showed an increased risk for cardiovascular death (HR 1.62; 95% CI 1.14 to 2.30) and the composite end point (HR 1.32; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.70). When stratified by treatment, 104 (5.7%) and 116 (6.4%) patients with WRF in the placebo and captopril groups had no significant association between…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 2,231 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