查看文章

CORRESPONDENCE events. A significantly greater proportion of participants with ED experienced hard events than those without ED (CHD hard events: 3.4% versus 1.4%, P< 0.001; CVD hard events: 6.3% versus 2.6%, P< 0.001). In the unadjusted Cox models, ED was a significant predictor of both hard CHD (hazard ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3–4.8) and CVD (hazard ratio, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.6–4.1) events. In the fully adjusted models (model 3), ED remained a significant predictor of hard CVD events (hazard ratio, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1–3.4), whereas hard CHD events became nonsignificant, albeit with a similar point estimate of risk (Figure). In the shifted-time cross-sectional analysis, a significant association was also seen between prior CVD event and ED at visit 5 (odds ratio, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.4–3.2), which remained significant but was attenuated by medication use and depression in the fully adjusted models …