4.5 Article

Brief Report: Trends in Hospitalizations Due to Acute Coronary Syndromes and Stroke in Patients With Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, 1996 to 2012

期刊

ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATOLOGY
卷 68, 期 11, 页码 2680-2685

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/art.39758

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH Intramural Research Program from the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases [ZIA-AR-041153]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ObjectiveCardiovascular disease (CVD) has been recognized as a major cause of morbidity in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), but it is not clear whether increased awareness of these risks has translated into improvements in CVD morbidity at the population level. The aim of this study was to examine trends in hospitalization rates for CVD events in a representative sample of adult patients with SLE in the US from 1996 to 2012. MethodsWe used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample to estimate the rates of hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction (MI), unstable angina, and ischemic stroke from 1996 to 2012 in patients with SLE. We compared these trends with those in the general population. ResultsDuring the study years, there were an estimated 31,012 hospitalizations for acute MI, 4,160 hospitalizations for unstable angina, and 26,144 hospitalizations for ischemic stroke among patients with SLE. The rates of hospitalization for acute MI and ischemic stroke increased over time in patients with SLE, while the rates for unstable angina decreased. The rates for all 3 conditions decreased in the general population over these years, with hospitalization rates for unstable angina decreasing faster in the general population than in patients with SLE. ConclusionIncreased awareness of the burden of CVD in patients with SLE has not yet translated into decreased rates of hospitalization for acute MI or stroke. This may be due to barriers in implementation of CVD risk factor modification or to SLE-specific risks that have not yet been identified or effectively targeted.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据