Statins and associated risk of pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies
- First Online:
- 235 Downloads
Statins have potential anti-inflammatory effects, but the association between statin use and lower incidence of pneumonia is unclear. We have therefore performed a systematic review on the risk of pneumonia in statin users versus non-users.
MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched in December 2010 for controlled observational studies that reported on the risk of pneumonia in statin users. We performed a random effects meta-analysis and assessed heterogeneity using the I2 statistic.
A total of 451 citations were screened, and ultimately nine studies (4 case–control, 4 retrospective cohort, 1 prospective cohort) with more than 3 million participants were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled analysis of seven studies that reported unadjusted data failed to show a significantly reduced risk of pneumonia [odds ratio (OR) 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84–1.06, p = 0.33, I2 = 79%] in statin users as compared to non-users. However, a significant reduction in the likelihood of pneumonia associated with statin use (n = 8 studies, OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75–0.97, p = 0.02, I2 = 81%) was found in the meta-analysis of adjusted data. Both analyses were limited by substantial statistical heterogeneity. Sensitivity analysis failed to fully clarify the source of heterogeneity, but cohort studies seemed to be less heterogenous (n = 5 studies, OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84–1.01, I2 = 43%).
Our findings indicate that the purported benefit of statins in preventing pneumonia is inconsistent, and of low magnitude, with upper bounds of the confidence interval being close to null. In view of the substantial statistical and clinical heterogeneity in the dataset, there is no convincing evidence to support the therapeutic application of statins for reducing the risk of pneumonia.
KeywordsStatins Pneumonia Meta-analysis
- 3.Baigent C, Keech A, Kearney PM, Blackwell L, Buck G, Pollicino C, Kirby A, Sourjina T, Peto R, Collins R, Simes R (2005) Efficacy and safety of cholesterol lowering treatment: prospective meta-analysis of data from 90,056 participants in 14 randomised trials of statins. Lancet 366:1267–1278PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Yende S, Milbrandt EB, Kellum JA, Kong L, Delude RL, Weissfeld LA, Angus DC (2011) Understanding the role of statins in pneumonia and sepsis. Crit Care Med 39(8):1871–1878Google Scholar
- 21.Loke YK, Price D, Herxheimer A (2008) Chapter 14: adverse effects. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. John Wiley & Sons, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
- 22.Ioannidis JP, Trikalinos TA (2007) The appropriateness of asymmetry tests for publication bias in meta-analyses: a large survey. Can Med Assoc J 176(8):1091–1096Google Scholar
- 35.Hippisley-Cox J, Coupland C (2010) Unintended effects of statins in men and women in England and Wales: population based cohort study using the QResearch database. Br Med J 340:c2197. doi:10.1136/bmj.c2197
- 36.Marston BJ, Plouffe JF, File TM Jr, Hackman BA, Salstrom SJ, Lipman HB, Kolczak MS, Breiman RF (1997) Incidence of community-acquired pneumonia requiring hospitalization Results of a population-based active surveillance study in Ohio. The Community-Based Pneumonia Incidence Study Group. Arch Intern Med 157(15):1709–1718PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar