Association between Use of Statins and Mortality in Patients with Heart Failure and Ejection Fraction of ≥50%
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The pathophysiology of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction is poorly understood, but may involve a systemic proinflammatory state. Therefore, statins might improve outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction defined as ≥50%. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 46 959 unique patients in the prospective Swedish Heart Failure Registry, 9140 patients had heart failure and ejection fraction ≥50% (age 77±11 years, 54.0% women), and of these, 3427 (37.5%) were treated with statins. Propensity scores for statin treatment were derived from 40 baseline variables. The association between statin use and primary (all-cause mortality) and secondary (separately, cardiovascular mortality, and combined all-cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization) end points was assessed with Cox regressions in a population matched 1:1 based on age and propensity score. In the matched population, 1-year survival was 85.1% for statin-treated versus 80.9% for untreated patients (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.89; P<0.001). Statins were also associated with reduced cardiovascular death (hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.75-0.98; P=0.026) and composite all-cause mortality or cardiovascular hospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-0.96; P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: In heart failure with ejection fraction ≥50%, the use of statins was associated with improved outcomes. The mechanisms should be evaluated and the effects tested in a randomized trial.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Statins reduce HFpEF morbidity and mortality, and this benefit might depend in part on EAT and systemic inflammation reduction, not on the effect on diabetes.
“Several studies support a reduction of HFpEF morbidity and mortality induced by statins, a benefit that might depend in part on EAT and systemic inflammation reduction, and not on the effect on diabetes [148,149].”
From Dysregulated epicardial adipose tissue as a risk factor and potential therapeutic target of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction in diabetes (2022) · cites this paper as [148]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 51 · Cited by 109
- Authors
- Alehagen, U., Benson, L., Edner, M., Dahlström, U., & Lund, L. H.
- Affiliations
- Linköping University (SE)
- Venue
- Circulation Heart Failure
- Published
- 2015-09
- Volume
- 8
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 862-870
- ISSN
- 1941-3289 (ISSN-L)
- 1941-3297
- OpenAlex
- W2176770752
- Cited by
- 109
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 8.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Circulation Heart Failure (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Lipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
- Keywords
- statins, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, cardiovascular hospitalization, proinflammatory state, propensity score matching, Swedish Heart Failure Registry
- MeSH terms
- Aged, Cause of Death, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Heart Failure, Humans, Male, Retrospective Studies, Stroke Volume, Sweden, Survival Rate, Risk Assessment, Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors, Propensity Score
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review