Evidence Hub

Omega-3 Fatty acids and mortality outcome in patients with and without type 2 diabetes after myocardial infarction: a retrospective, matched-cohort study

C. Poole, J. Halcox, S. Jenkins-Jones, E. Carr, M. Schifflers, K. Ray, C. Currie

Clinical Therapeutics, 2013

2,466 participants · 36 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There are conflicting data regarding the benefits of omega-3 (n-3) fatty acids, most recently in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to evaluate the impact of licensed, highly purified n-3 fatty acids on all-cause mortality after myocardial infarction (MI).

METHODS

This was a retrospective, matched-cohort study using data from the General Practice Research Database. Patients initiating treatment with 1 g of n-3 fatty acids in the 90 days after first MI were identified and each matched to 4 nonexposed patients. Progression to death was compared using time-dependent Cox models to account for potential differences in exposure to other cardiovascular risk-modifying treatments.

RESULTS

A total of 2466 eligible subjects exposed to n-3 fatty acids were matched. The majority of patients had concurrent treatment with lipid-lowering therapies, antihypertensives, and antiplatelets after first MI, with subjects exposed to n-3 fatty acids having a greater likelihood of concurrent exposure. For those initiating n-3 fatty acids within 90 days of first MI, the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) was 0.782 (95% CI, 0.641-0.995; P = 0.0159); for those initiating treatment within 14 days, the aHR was 0.680 (95% CI, 0.481-0.961; P = 0.0288). In patients with type 2 diabetes at baseline, the aHRs were 0.714 (95% CI, 0.454-1.124) and 0.597 (95% CI, 0.295-1.211) when initiation was within 90 and 14 days, respectively. Use of n-3 fatty acids resulted in a consistent survival…

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: 2,466 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