Key result
Continuing atorvastatin shows no benefit over placebo for severe sepsis progression in hospitalized patients.
Why the study?
In patients on prior statin therapy hospitalized for acute infections, it is unclear whether statins should be continued during hospitalization.
Does continuation of atorvastatin 20 mg improve the progression of sepsis in patients on preexisting statin therapy hospitalized for infection?
RCT (n=150)
double-blind
randomized
Does continuation of atorvastatin 20 mg improve the progression of sepsis in patients on preexisting statin therapy hospitalized for infection?
Odds Ratio: 1.17 (95% CI 0.56–2.47)
p-value: p=0.7
Continuing preexisting statin therapy during hospitalization for infection does not significantly alter the progression of sepsis or inflammatory parameters compared to cessation.
Does not support continuing atorvastatin for sepsis progression; confirms neutral effect on early decline and supports pausing in acute infection.
RATIONALE: In patients on prior statin therapy who are hospitalized for acute infections, current literature is unclear on whether statins should be continued during their hospitalization. OBJECTIVES: To test the hypothesis that continuation of therapy with statins influences the inflammatory response to infection and that cessation may cause an inflammatory rebound. METHODS: Prospective randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of atorvastatin (20 mg) or matched placebo in 150 patients on preexisting statin therapy requiring hospitalization for infection. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary end point was progression of sepsis during hospitalization. At baseline, the rate of severe sepsis was 32% in both groups. Compared with baseline, the odds ratio for severe sepsis declined in both groups: 0.43 placebo and 0.5 statins (Day 3) versus 0.14 placebo and 0.12 statins (Day 14). The rate of decline of severe sepsis was similar between the groups (odds ratio 1.17 [0.56-2.47], P = 0.7 Day 3; 0.85 [0.21-3.34], P = 0.8 Day 14). IL-6 and C-reactive protein declined in both groups with no statistically significant difference (P = 0.7 and P = 0.2, respectively). An increase in cholesterol occurred in the placebo group (P < 0.0001). Most patients were not critically ill. Hospital mortality was 6.6%, with no difference between the groups (6 [8%] of 75 statin group; 4 [5.3%] of 75 placebo group; P = 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: This study does not support a beneficial role of continuing preexisting statin therapy on sepsis and inflammatory parameters. Cessation of established statin therapy was not associated with an inflammatory rebound. Clinical trial registered at the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN 12605000756628).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Krüger et al. (2010) conducted an RCT in acute infection (n=150). atorvastatin vs. matched placebo was evaluated on progression of sepsis during hospitalization (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.56-2.47, p=0.7). Continuation of atorvastatin in patients hospitalized for infection did not significantly alter the decline of severe sepsis at day 3 compared with placebo (OR 1.17; 95% CI 0.56-2.47; P=0.7).
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: