The aim of this study was to assess and compare the efficacy of atorvastatin with rosuvastatin in preventing cardiovascular events among patients already diagnosed with cardiovascular disease (CVD). We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Two investigators independently searched online databases, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and the Excerpta Medica database (Embase), from the inception of databases until November 2023. The primary outcome assessed in the meta-analysis included cardiovascular mortality and a composite of cardiovascular events. Other outcomes included myocardial infarction and stroke. A total of four studies were selected for our meta-analysis. A total of 7,378 patients were enrolled, including 3,721 in the atorvastatin group and 3,657 in the rosuvastatin group. Pooled analysis showed that the incidence of composite cardiovascular events was not significantly different in patients receiving atorvastatin and patients receiving rosuvastatin (risk ratio (RR): 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.79 to 1.09, p-value: 0.38, I-square: 0%). Pooled analysis showed that the risk of cardiovascular mortality was not significantly different between the two study groups (RR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.51 to 1.81, p-value: 0.93, I-square: 0%). In conclusion, our meta-analysis, based on four selected studies, found no significant disparities in composite cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke between patients administered atorvastatin and those receiving rosuvastatin. This outcome underscores the comparable efficacy of these statins in mitigating cardiovascular risks, highlighting their clinical equipoise in the realm of secondary prevention.
Keywords: atorvastatin; cardiovascular event; efficacy; meta-analysis; rosuvastatin.
Copyright © 2023, Wei et al.