Dataset Information

Acid suppressants use and the risk of dementia: A population-based propensity score-matched cohort study.

ABSTRACT: In this population-based propensity score matched (PSM) cohort study, we aimed to investigate the risk of developing dementia with the use of acid suppressants, including proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2 antagonists). Cohorts of PPI users (n = 2,778), H2 antagonist users (n = 6,165), and non-users (n = 86,238) were selected from a dataset covering the years 2000 to 2010 in Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. Patients in the three groups were PSM at a ratio of 1:1 within each comparison cohort (CC). Three CCs were created: (1) PPI users compared to non-users (CC1, n = 2,583 pairs); (2) H2 antagonist users compared to non-users (CC2, n = 5,955 pairs); and (3) PPI users compared to H2 antagonist users (CC3, n = 2,765 pairs). A multivariable robust Cox proportional hazard model was used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the risk of developing dementia. The multivariable analysis results show that the aHR of developing dementia during the follow-up period was 0.72 (CC1: 95% CI = 0.51-1.03, P = 0.07) for PPI users and 0.95 (CC2: 95% CI = 0.74-1.22, P = 0.69) for H2 antagonist users, when compared to non-users. Between the patients using acid suppressants, there was no difference between PPI and H2 antagonist users in the risk of developing dementia (CC3: aHR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.58-1.17, P = 0.28). In conclusion, no association was observed between the use of acid suppressants and the risk of developing dementia in any of the three CCs. Further, randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm this relationship.

SUBMITTER: Wu CL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7703973 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWhether the route of anaesthesia is an independent risk factor for dementia remains unclear. Therefore, we conducted a propensity score-matched (PSM) population-based cohort study to compare dementia incidence among surgical patients undergoing different routes of anaesthesia.MethodsThe inclusion criteria were being an inpatient >20 years of age who underwent major elective surgery, defined as those requiring GA without or with inhalation anaesthetics or regional anaesthesia, and being hospitalised for >1 day between Jan 1, 2008 and Dec 31, 2019 in Taiwan. Patients undergoing major elective surgery were categorised into three groups according to the type of anaesthesia administered: noninhalation anaesthesia, inhalation anaesthesia, and regional anaesthesia, matched at a 1:1 ratio. The incidence rate (IR) of dementia was determined.FindingsPSM yielded 63,750 patients (21,250 in the noninhalation anaesthesia group, 21,250 in the inhalation anaesthesia group, and 21,250 in the regional anaesthesia group). In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs; 95% confidence intervals) of dementia for the inhalation and noninhalation anaesthesia groups compared with the regional anaesthesia group were 20.16 (15.40-26.35; p < 0.001) and 18.33 (14.03-24.04; p < 0.001), respectively. The aHR of dementia for inhalation anaesthesia compared with noninhalation anaesthesia was 1.13 (1.03-1.22; p = 0.028). The IRs of dementia for the inhalation, noninhalation, and regional anaesthesia groups were 3647.90, 3492.00, and 272.99 per 100,000 person-years, respectively.InterpretationIn this population based cohort study, the incidence of dementia among surgical patients undergoing general anaesthesia was higher than among those undergoing regional anaesthesia. Among patients undergoing general anaesthesia, inhalation anaesthesia was associated with a higher risk of dementia than noninhalation anaesthesia. Our results should be confirmed in a randomised controlled trial.FundingThe study was partially supported by Lo-Hsu Medical Foundation, Lotung Poh-Ai Hospital (Funding Number: 10908, 10909, 11001, 11002, 11003, 11006, and 11013).

Project description:BackgroundLiver cancer is among the top five most common cancers globally. Lipid-lowering drugs such as statins can lower the risk of liver cancer, but may also cause liver damage. LipoCol Forte capsules (LFC), a red yeast rice product, have demonstrated significant antihypercholesterolemic effects and a good safety profile in clinical studies.AimTo evaluate whether LFC lowers the risk of liver cancer in adults in this propensity score-matched, nationwide, population-based cohort study.MethodsWe used data from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database, which includes electronic medical records for up to 99.99% of Taiwan's population. LFC users and LFC non-users were matched 1:1 by propensity scores between January 2010 and December 2017. All had follow-up data for at least 1 year. Statistical analyses compared demographic distributions including sex, age, comorbidities, and prescribed medications. Cox regression analyses estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) after adjusting for potential confounders.ResultsWe enrolled 33231 LFC users and 33231 non-LFC users (controls). No significant differences between the study cohorts were identified regarding comorbidities and medications [standardized mean difference (SMD) < 0.05]. At follow-up, the overall incidence of liver cancer was significantly lower in the LFC cohort compared with controls [aHR 0.91; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86-0.95; P < 0.001]. The risk of liver cancer was significantly reduced in both females (aHR 0.87; 95%CI: 0.8-0.94; P < 0.001) and males (aHR 0.93; 95%CI: 0.87-0.98; P < 0.01) in the LFC cohort compared with their counterparts in the non-LFC cohort. The antitumor protective effects applied to patients with comorbidities (including hypertension, ischemic stroke, diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, hepatitis B infection and hepatitis C infection). Those using LFC for more than 84 drug days had a 0.64-fold lower risk of liver cancer compared with controls (P < 0.001). Compared with controls, the risk of developing liver cancer in the LFC cohort progressively decreased over time; the lowest incidence of liver cancer occurred in LFC users followed-up for more than 6 years (27.44 vs 31.49 per 1,000 person-years; aHR 0.75; 95%CI: 0.68-0.82; P < 0.001).ConclusionThis retrospective cohort study indicates that LFC has a significantly protective effect on lowering the risk of liver cancer, in a dose-dependent and time-dependent manner.

Project description:ObjectivesWe examined the relationship between dominant sedation strategy, risk of delirium and patient-centred outcomes in adults admitted to intensive care units (ICUs).DesignRetrospective propensity-matched cohort study.SettingMechanically ventilated adults (≥ 18 years) admitted to four Canadian hospital medical/surgical ICUs from 2014 to 2016 in Calgary, Alberta, Canada.Participants2837 mechanically ventilated adults (≥ 18 years) requiring admission to a medical/surgical ICU were evaluated for the relationship between sedation strategy and delirium.InterventionsNone.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary exposure was dominant sedation strategy, defined as the sedative infusion, including midazolam, propofol or fentanyl, with the longest duration before the first delirium assessment. The primary outcome was 'ever delirium' identified using the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist. Secondary outcomes included mortality, length of stay (LOS), ventilation duration and days with delirium. The cohort was analysed in two propensity score (patient characteristics and therapies received) matched cohorts (propofol vs fentanyl and propofol vs midazolam).Results2837 patients (60.7% male; median age 57 years (IQR 43-68)) were considered for propensity matching. In propensity score-matched cohorts(propofol vs midazolam, n=712; propofol vs fentanyl, n=1732), the odds of delirium were significantly higher with midazolam (OR 1.46 (95% CI 1.06 to 2.00)) and fentanyl (OR 1.22 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.48)) compared with propofol dominant sedation strategies. Dominant sedation strategy with midazolam and fentanyl were associated with a longer duration of ventilation compared with propofol. Fentanyl was also associated with increased ICU mortality (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.12)) ICU and hospital LOS compared with a propofol dominant sedation strategy.ConclusionsWe identified a novel association between fentanyl dominant sedation strategies and an increased risk of delirium, a composite outcome of delirium or death, duration of mechanical ventilation, ICU LOS and hospital LOS. Midazolam dominant sedation strategies were associated with increased delirium risk and mechanical ventilation duration.

Dataset Information

Acid suppressants use and the risk of dementia: A population-based propensity score-matched cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets