Diabetes in acute coronary syndrome patients: do we see only the tip of the iceberg?

M. Vavlukis, Gordana Kamceva, D. Kitanoski, B. Pocesta, E. Caparovska, Hajber Taravari, Enes Shehu, Ivica Bojovski, F. Janusevski, Filip Taneski, I. Kotlar, S. Kedev
{"title":"Diabetes in acute coronary syndrome patients: do we see only the tip of the iceberg?","authors":"M. Vavlukis, Gordana Kamceva, D. Kitanoski, B. Pocesta, E. Caparovska, Hajber Taravari, Enes Shehu, Ivica Bojovski, F. Janusevski, Filip Taneski, I. Kotlar, S. Kedev","doi":"10.13140/RG.2.1.1338.6961","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim of the study: To analyse the influence of glycoregulation in pts. with known or newly detected diabetes, on in-hospital morbidity/mortality in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Methods: randomly selected ACS patients were analysed for: stress glycaemia, HgbA1c, risk profile, lipid profile, SINTAX score, TIMI flow, LV function and in-hospital morbidity/mortality. We comparatively analysed pts. based on the level of HgbA1c (⩾ 6,5% vs 6.5%). Mean values of HgbA1c and stress glycaemia were as follows: NonD - 5.19±0.56 and 6.82±1.87; PD - 5.99±0.19 and 8.32±3.17; ND - 8.19±1.15 and 17.68.19±1.15; CD - 5.79±0.55 and 8.89±4.38; and UD - 9.36±1.33 and 16.23±6.24; (ANOVA p >0.000). No significant difference was found between NonD and CD pts., and between ND and UD (high in the last two), but there was significant difference in HgbA1c (p 0.000, Kappa agreement (0.516; sig p>0.000). TG levels were increased only in UD, and ND groups: 1.93±1.06, and 2.36±1.22, (ANOVA p=0.026, Tukey test ND vs NonD p=0.050; and vs PD p=0.016), without significant difference in other lipid fractions. Mean SINTAX score was 15.45±8.2, without significant inter-gorup differences. TIMI flow before PCI significantly differed across the groups, the lowest being in ND - 0.14±0.36 and PD - 1.13±1.42 pts. (group value 1.37±1.42; ANOVA p=0.001; Tukey test: NonD vs ND 0.000; and 0.043 vs CD). Mean EF was 51.51±8.5, without significant inter-group difference. 29 in-hospital events in 22 (19%) patients were registered: 7.7% arrhythmias, 6.9% heart failure, 3.4% GIT bleedings, and 2.6% CVI. In-hospital mortality was 4.3%. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, ejection fraction, stress glycaemia, and HgbA1c were identified as independent predictors of in-hospital outcome. Conclusion: High prevalence of unknown diabetes in ACS patients exists, leading to worse CAD, even in comparison with pts with known, well controlled diabetes. Stress glycaemia, HgbA1c and ejection fraction are independent predictors of in-hospital morbidity/mortality.","PeriodicalId":87385,"journal":{"name":"Acute cardiac care","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acute cardiac care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1338.6961","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim of the study: To analyse the influence of glycoregulation in pts. with known or newly detected diabetes, on in-hospital morbidity/mortality in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Methods: randomly selected ACS patients were analysed for: stress glycaemia, HgbA1c, risk profile, lipid profile, SINTAX score, TIMI flow, LV function and in-hospital morbidity/mortality. We comparatively analysed pts. based on the level of HgbA1c (⩾ 6,5% vs 6.5%). Mean values of HgbA1c and stress glycaemia were as follows: NonD - 5.19±0.56 and 6.82±1.87; PD - 5.99±0.19 and 8.32±3.17; ND - 8.19±1.15 and 17.68.19±1.15; CD - 5.79±0.55 and 8.89±4.38; and UD - 9.36±1.33 and 16.23±6.24; (ANOVA p >0.000). No significant difference was found between NonD and CD pts., and between ND and UD (high in the last two), but there was significant difference in HgbA1c (p 0.000, Kappa agreement (0.516; sig p>0.000). TG levels were increased only in UD, and ND groups: 1.93±1.06, and 2.36±1.22, (ANOVA p=0.026, Tukey test ND vs NonD p=0.050; and vs PD p=0.016), without significant difference in other lipid fractions. Mean SINTAX score was 15.45±8.2, without significant inter-gorup differences. TIMI flow before PCI significantly differed across the groups, the lowest being in ND - 0.14±0.36 and PD - 1.13±1.42 pts. (group value 1.37±1.42; ANOVA p=0.001; Tukey test: NonD vs ND 0.000; and 0.043 vs CD). Mean EF was 51.51±8.5, without significant inter-group difference. 29 in-hospital events in 22 (19%) patients were registered: 7.7% arrhythmias, 6.9% heart failure, 3.4% GIT bleedings, and 2.6% CVI. In-hospital mortality was 4.3%. In multivariate logistic regression analysis, ejection fraction, stress glycaemia, and HgbA1c were identified as independent predictors of in-hospital outcome. Conclusion: High prevalence of unknown diabetes in ACS patients exists, leading to worse CAD, even in comparison with pts with known, well controlled diabetes. Stress glycaemia, HgbA1c and ejection fraction are independent predictors of in-hospital morbidity/mortality.
急性冠状动脉综合征患者的糖尿病:我们只看到了冰山一角吗?
目的:分析肝糖调节对糖尿病患者的影响。已知或新发现糖尿病对急性冠状动脉综合征患者住院发病率/死亡率的影响方法:对随机选择的ACS患者进行分析:应激性血糖、糖化血红蛋白、风险特征、血脂、SINTAX评分、TIMI血流、左室功能和住院发病率/死亡率。我们比较分析了分数。基于hba1c水平(大于或等于6.5 vs 6.5%)。糖化血红蛋白(HgbA1c)和应激血糖平均值分别为:NonD - 5.19±0.56和6.82±1.87;PD - 5.99±0.19和8.32±3.17;ND - 8.19±1.15和17.68.19±1.15;CD - 5.79±0.55和8.89±4.38;UD分别为9.36±1.33和16.23±6.24;(方差分析p < 0.05)。nnd与CD患者无明显差异。两组间HgbA1c差异有统计学意义(p 0.000, Kappa一致性(0.516;sig p > 0.000)。仅UD组和ND组TG水平升高:1.93±1.06和2.36±1.22,(方差分析p=0.026, Tukey检验ND vs ND p=0.050;p=0.016),其他脂质组分差异无统计学意义。平均SINTAX评分为15.45±8.2,组间差异无统计学意义。PCI前TIMI血流组间差异显著,ND组- 0.14±0.36,PD组- 1.13±1.42。(组值1.37±1.42;方差分析p = 0.001;火鸡检验:ND vs ND 0.000;0.043 vs CD)。平均EF为51.51±8.5,组间差异无统计学意义。22例(19%)患者中有29例住院事件:心律失常7.7%,心力衰竭6.9%,GIT出血3.4%,CVI 2.6%。住院死亡率为4.3%。在多变量logistic回归分析中,射血分数、应激性血糖和糖化血红蛋白被确定为院内预后的独立预测因子。结论:ACS患者中存在未知糖尿病的高患病率,甚至与已知且控制良好的糖尿病患者相比,导致更严重的CAD。应激性血糖、糖化血红蛋白和射血分数是院内发病率/死亡率的独立预测因子。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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