Long-term impact of diabetes on mortality in patients undergoing unprotected left main PCI: a propensity score-matched analysis from the BIA-LM registry.

IF 8.5 1区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Paweł Kralisz, Emil Julian Dąbrowski, Sławomir Dobrzycki, Wiktoria Urszula Kozłowska, Patrycja Oliwia Lipska, Konrad Nowak, Kamil Gugała, Przemysław Prokopczuk, Grzegorz Mężyński, Michał Święczkowski, Marcin Kożuch
{"title":"Long-term impact of diabetes on mortality in patients undergoing unprotected left main PCI: a propensity score-matched analysis from the BIA-LM registry.","authors":"Paweł Kralisz, Emil Julian Dąbrowski, Sławomir Dobrzycki, Wiktoria Urszula Kozłowska, Patrycja Oliwia Lipska, Konrad Nowak, Kamil Gugała, Przemysław Prokopczuk, Grzegorz Mężyński, Michał Święczkowski, Marcin Kożuch","doi":"10.1186/s12933-025-02733-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is modest data on long-term impact of diabetes on left main coronary artery (LMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This observational study, based on the largest single-center registry of LMCA PCI in Poland, evaluated the impact of diabetes on long-term survival following PCI in a real-world setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed 998 patients who underwent LMCA PCI between December 27, 2007, and February 21, 2022. Diabetes and insulin dependence were defined based on medical history, prior records, and prescribed treatment. The endpoint was all-cause mortality at the longest available follow-up (mean 4.2 years). Survival analysis was conducted in the overall cohort and a one-to-one propensity score-matched (PSM) population. Moderation effects and differences between subgroups were analysed in predefined groups of PSM cohort.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The median age was 71 (63-79) years; 212 (28.2%) were women, and 250 (33.2%) had diabetes. In the overall cohort, diabetes was associated with a worse prognosis (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.03-1.76, P = 0.03). PSM resulted in 214 well-balanced pairs (median age 73 years (66-79)), with no significant difference in all-cause mortality between groups (adjusted HR 1.27, 95% CI 0.91-1.77, P = 0.16). After PSM subgroup analysis showed worse outcomes for patients with diabetes undergoing two-stent angioplasty (HR 3.70, 95% CI 1.64-8.34, P = 0.002) and elective PCI (HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.29-3.31, P = 0.003). Conversely, among patients presenting with myocardial infarction (MI), people with diabetes had better survival than the control group (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.90, P = 0.02). No significant differences in outcomes were observed in patients with heart failure (HR 1.29, 95% CI 0.88-1.89, P = 0.19), chronic kidney disease (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.69-1.71, P = 0.19), intravascular imaging use (HR 1.38, 95% CI 0.70-2.71, P = 0.35), or concomitant multivessel disease (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.75-1.73, P = 0.53).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>No significant association was observed between diabetes and overall mortality following LMCA PCI. Sensitivity analyses showed worse survival outcomes in diabetic patients treated with two-stent techniques and undergoing non-emergency PCI. These findings suggest the overall safety of PCI for LMCA in people with diabetes and highlight the need for randomized trials, especially investigating indicated high-risk subgroups.</p>","PeriodicalId":9374,"journal":{"name":"Cardiovascular Diabetology","volume":"24 1","pages":"175"},"PeriodicalIF":8.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12013000/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cardiovascular Diabetology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12933-025-02733-5","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is modest data on long-term impact of diabetes on left main coronary artery (LMCA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This observational study, based on the largest single-center registry of LMCA PCI in Poland, evaluated the impact of diabetes on long-term survival following PCI in a real-world setting.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 998 patients who underwent LMCA PCI between December 27, 2007, and February 21, 2022. Diabetes and insulin dependence were defined based on medical history, prior records, and prescribed treatment. The endpoint was all-cause mortality at the longest available follow-up (mean 4.2 years). Survival analysis was conducted in the overall cohort and a one-to-one propensity score-matched (PSM) population. Moderation effects and differences between subgroups were analysed in predefined groups of PSM cohort.

Results: The median age was 71 (63-79) years; 212 (28.2%) were women, and 250 (33.2%) had diabetes. In the overall cohort, diabetes was associated with a worse prognosis (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.03-1.76, P = 0.03). PSM resulted in 214 well-balanced pairs (median age 73 years (66-79)), with no significant difference in all-cause mortality between groups (adjusted HR 1.27, 95% CI 0.91-1.77, P = 0.16). After PSM subgroup analysis showed worse outcomes for patients with diabetes undergoing two-stent angioplasty (HR 3.70, 95% CI 1.64-8.34, P = 0.002) and elective PCI (HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.29-3.31, P = 0.003). Conversely, among patients presenting with myocardial infarction (MI), people with diabetes had better survival than the control group (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.90, P = 0.02). No significant differences in outcomes were observed in patients with heart failure (HR 1.29, 95% CI 0.88-1.89, P = 0.19), chronic kidney disease (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.69-1.71, P = 0.19), intravascular imaging use (HR 1.38, 95% CI 0.70-2.71, P = 0.35), or concomitant multivessel disease (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.75-1.73, P = 0.53).

Conclusions: No significant association was observed between diabetes and overall mortality following LMCA PCI. Sensitivity analyses showed worse survival outcomes in diabetic patients treated with two-stent techniques and undergoing non-emergency PCI. These findings suggest the overall safety of PCI for LMCA in people with diabetes and highlight the need for randomized trials, especially investigating indicated high-risk subgroups.

糖尿病对无保护左主干PCI患者死亡率的长期影响:来自BIA-LM登记的倾向评分匹配分析
背景:关于糖尿病对左主干冠状动脉(LMCA)经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的长期影响的数据不多。这项观察性研究基于波兰最大的LMCA PCI单中心登记,评估了糖尿病对PCI术后长期生存的影响。方法:我们回顾性分析了2007年12月27日至2022年2月21日期间接受LMCA PCI治疗的998例患者。糖尿病和胰岛素依赖的定义基于病史、既往记录和处方治疗。终点是最长随访时间(平均4.2年)的全因死亡率。在整个队列和一对一倾向评分匹配(PSM)人群中进行生存分析。分析PSM队列预定义组的调节效应及亚组间差异。结果:中位年龄71(63 ~ 79)岁;212人(28.2%)为女性,250人(33.2%)患有糖尿病。在整个队列中,糖尿病与较差的预后相关(HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.03-1.76, P = 0.03)。PSM导致214对平衡良好的配对(中位年龄73岁(66-79岁)),两组间全因死亡率无显著差异(校正HR 1.27, 95% CI 0.91-1.77, P = 0.16)。经PSM亚组分析显示,糖尿病患者行双支架血管成形术(HR 3.70, 95% CI 1.64-8.34, P = 0.002)和择期PCI (HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.29-3.31, P = 0.003)的预后较差。相反,在出现心肌梗死(MI)的患者中,糖尿病患者的生存率高于对照组(HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.90, P = 0.02)。心力衰竭(HR 1.29, 95% CI 0.88-1.89, P = 0.19)、慢性肾脏疾病(HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.69-1.71, P = 0.19)、血管内显像使用(HR 1.38, 95% CI 0.70-2.71, P = 0.35)或合并多血管疾病(HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.75-1.73, P = 0.53)患者的结局无显著差异。结论:LMCA PCI术后糖尿病与总死亡率无显著相关性。敏感性分析显示,接受双支架技术和非紧急PCI治疗的糖尿病患者的生存结果更差。这些发现表明糖尿病患者LMCA PCI的总体安全性,并强调了随机试验的必要性,特别是调查高危亚组。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cardiovascular Diabetology
Cardiovascular Diabetology 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
12.30
自引率
15.10%
发文量
240
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Cardiovascular Diabetology is a journal that welcomes manuscripts exploring various aspects of the relationship between diabetes, cardiovascular health, and the metabolic syndrome. We invite submissions related to clinical studies, genetic investigations, experimental research, pharmacological studies, epidemiological analyses, and molecular biology research in this field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信