Key result
Glyburide is not linked to higher major event risk versus gliclazide in post-MI or PCI patients.
Why the study?
Does glyburide increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular events compared to gliclazide in older patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction or percutaneous coronary intervention?
Cohort (n=2,674)
Does glyburide increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular events compared to gliclazide in older patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction or percutaneous coronary intervention?
Hazard Ratio: 1.01 (95% CI 0.86–1.18)
Glyburide does not increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular events compared to gliclazide in older high-risk patients, suggesting its theoretical interference with ischemic preconditioning lacks clinical relevance.
No excess CV risk seen with glyburide vs gliclazide in older post-MI/PCI patients; leaves open effects in broader populations or randomized trials.
AIMS: Sulphonylureas promote insulin release by inhibiting pancreatic potassium channels. Older sulphonylureas such as glyburide (glibenclamide), but not newer ones such as gliclazide, antagonize similar channels in myocardium, interfering with the protective effects of ischaemic preconditioning. Whether this imparts a higher risk of adverse cardiac events is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study of patients aged 66 years and older who were hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction or who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2010 while receiving either glyburide or gliclazide. We used a high-dimensional propensity score matching process to ensure similarity of glyburide- and gliclazide-treated patients. The primary outcome was a composite of death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction or heart failure. RESULTS: During the 2-year study period, we matched 1690 patients treated with glyburide to 984 patients treated with gliclazide at the time of hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction or percutaneous coronary intervention. We found no difference in the risk of the composite outcome among patients receiving glyburide (adjusted hazard ratio 1.01; 95% CI 0.86-1.18). We found similar results in secondary analyses of each outcome individually, and in two supplementary analyses (haemorrhage and pneumonia) in which we anticipated no difference between the two patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among older patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction or percutaneous coronary intervention, treatment with glyburide is not associated with an increased risk of future adverse cardiovascular events relative to gliclazide, suggesting that the effect of glyburide on ischaemic preconditioning is of little clinical relevance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Juurlink et al. (2012) conducted a cohort in Acute myocardial infarction or percutaneous coronary intervention (n=2,674). Glyburide vs. Gliclazide was evaluated on Composite of death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction or heart failure (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.86-1.18). Glyburide was not associated with an increased risk of death, MI, or heart failure compared to gliclazide among older patients hospitalized for acute MI or PCI (HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.86-1.18).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: