Why the study?
Do traditional atherosclerotic risk factors predict the risk of arterial and venous thrombosis similarly in a general population?
Do traditional atherosclerotic risk factors predict the risk of arterial and venous thrombosis similarly in a general population?
Traditional atherosclerotic risk factors such as smoking, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes are associated with arterial thrombosis (MI) but not venous thrombosis (VTE).
Traditional risk factors predict MI but not VTE; leaves open whether prevention strategies should differ for arterial versus venous events.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate and compare the impact of traditional atherosclerotic risk factors for the risk of arterial and venous thrombosis, taking into account competing risks. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 1994-1995, 26,185 subjects were screened in the Tromsø study. Information on traditional atherosclerotic risk factors was obtained by physical examination, blood samples, and questionnaires. Subjects were followed to the first incident event of myocardial infarction (MI) or venous thromboembolism (VTE), or December 31, 2005. During a median of 10.8 years of follow-up, there were 1279 cases of incident MI and 341 VTE events. Advancing age and high body mass index were both associated with MI and VTE. Hazard ratio per decade of age was 2.34 (95% CI: 2.25-2.43) for MI and 1.87 (1.74-2.01) for VTE, and 3 kg/m(2) increase in body mass index was associated with 1.16 (1.11-1.21) and 1.20 (1.12-1.29) increased risk of MI and VTE, respectively. Blood pressure, high levels of triglycerides and total cholesterol, low HDL cholesterol, self-reported diabetes, and smoking were all associated with increased risk of MI but not associated with VTE. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings imply that traditional atherosclerotic risk factors, such as smoking, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes mellitus are not shared by arterial and venous thrombosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brækkan et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: