单纯糖耐量受损和合并代谢综合征对心血管事件和死亡的长期风险的影响。

IF 3 2区 医学 Q2 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Fei Chen, Yifan He, Jinping Wang, Liping Yu, Qiuhong Gong, Yanyan Chen, Yali An, Siyao He, Guangwei Li, Bo Zhang
{"title":"单纯糖耐量受损和合并代谢综合征对心血管事件和死亡的长期风险的影响。","authors":"Fei Chen,&nbsp;Yifan He,&nbsp;Jinping Wang,&nbsp;Liping Yu,&nbsp;Qiuhong Gong,&nbsp;Yanyan Chen,&nbsp;Yali An,&nbsp;Siyao He,&nbsp;Guangwei Li,&nbsp;Bo Zhang","doi":"10.1111/1753-0407.13598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>This study aimed to investigate the potential differences in the influence of impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) with and without metabolic syndrome (MetS) on cardiovascular (CV) events and mortality.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Participants having IGT with MetS (IGT_MetS), those having IGT without MetS (IGT_non_MetS), and those having normal glucose tolerance (NGT) without MetS (NGT_non_MetS) (<i>N</i> = 246, <i>N</i> = 294, and <i>N</i> = 471, respectively) were included in this study. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine the relationship among these three groups and CV events and mortality.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Over the 30-year follow-up period, 57 (12.1%) participants having NGT_non_MetS, 55 (18.71%) with IGT_non_MetS, and 74 (30.08%) with IGT_MetS experienced CV mortality. After adjusting for risk factors, the hazard ratios for CV mortality were 2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38–2.91) for the IGT_non_MetS group and 2.96 (95% CI, 2.09–4.19) for the IGT_MetS group, compared with the NGT_non_MetS group. Similar patterns were observed for CV events, with hazard ratios of 1.49 (95% CI, 1.19–1.88) for the IGT_non_MetS group and 1.97 (95% CI, 1.58–2.47) for the IGT_MetS group. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the hazard ratios of the IGT_non_MetS and IGT_MetS groups indicated a higher risk of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction events or myocardial infarction mortality, and stroke events or stroke mortality compared with that of the NGT_non_MetS group.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>IGT_non_MetS increased the risk of CV mortality and events. Furthermore, when it occurred in conjunction with MetS, it further increased the risk of CV mortality and events. This suggested that active intervention is required.</p>\n \n <div>\n <figure>\n <div><picture>\n <source></source></picture><p></p>\n </div>\n </figure>\n </div>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Diabetes","volume":"16 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1753-0407.13598","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Influence of impaired glucose tolerance alone and combined with metabolic syndrome on long-term risk of cardiovascular events and mortality\",\"authors\":\"Fei Chen,&nbsp;Yifan He,&nbsp;Jinping Wang,&nbsp;Liping Yu,&nbsp;Qiuhong Gong,&nbsp;Yanyan Chen,&nbsp;Yali An,&nbsp;Siyao He,&nbsp;Guangwei Li,&nbsp;Bo Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1753-0407.13598\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>This study aimed to investigate the potential differences in the influence of impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) with and without metabolic syndrome (MetS) on cardiovascular (CV) events and mortality.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Participants having IGT with MetS (IGT_MetS), those having IGT without MetS (IGT_non_MetS), and those having normal glucose tolerance (NGT) without MetS (NGT_non_MetS) (<i>N</i> = 246, <i>N</i> = 294, and <i>N</i> = 471, respectively) were included in this study. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine the relationship among these three groups and CV events and mortality.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Over the 30-year follow-up period, 57 (12.1%) participants having NGT_non_MetS, 55 (18.71%) with IGT_non_MetS, and 74 (30.08%) with IGT_MetS experienced CV mortality. After adjusting for risk factors, the hazard ratios for CV mortality were 2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38–2.91) for the IGT_non_MetS group and 2.96 (95% CI, 2.09–4.19) for the IGT_MetS group, compared with the NGT_non_MetS group. Similar patterns were observed for CV events, with hazard ratios of 1.49 (95% CI, 1.19–1.88) for the IGT_non_MetS group and 1.97 (95% CI, 1.58–2.47) for the IGT_MetS group. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the hazard ratios of the IGT_non_MetS and IGT_MetS groups indicated a higher risk of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction events or myocardial infarction mortality, and stroke events or stroke mortality compared with that of the NGT_non_MetS group.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>IGT_non_MetS increased the risk of CV mortality and events. Furthermore, when it occurred in conjunction with MetS, it further increased the risk of CV mortality and events. This suggested that active intervention is required.</p>\\n \\n <div>\\n <figure>\\n <div><picture>\\n <source></source></picture><p></p>\\n </div>\\n </figure>\\n </div>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":189,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Diabetes\",\"volume\":\"16 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1753-0407.13598\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Diabetes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1753-0407.13598\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Diabetes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1753-0407.13598","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景本研究旨在探讨伴有和不伴有代谢综合征(MetS)的糖耐量受损(IGT)对心血管(CV)事件和死亡率影响的潜在差异:本研究纳入了伴有代谢综合征的糖耐量受损患者(IGT_MetS)、不伴有代谢综合征的糖耐量受损患者(IGT_non_MetS)和不伴有代谢综合征的正常糖耐量(NGT)患者(N = 246、N = 294 和 N = 471)。研究采用 Cox 比例危险度回归法检测这三个组别与冠心病事件和死亡率之间的关系:在 30 年的随访期间,57 名(12.1%)NGT_non_MetS 患者、55 名(18.71%)IGT_non_MetS 患者和 74 名(30.08%)IGT_MetS 患者出现了冠心病死亡。调整风险因素后,与 NGT_non_MetS 组相比,IGT_non_MetS 组的 CV 死亡率危险比为 2(95% 置信区间 [CI],1.38-2.91),IGT_MetS 组的 CV 死亡率危险比为 2.96(95% 置信区间 [CI],2.09-4.19)。在心血管事件方面也观察到类似的模式,IGT_non_MetS 组的危险比为 1.49(95% CI,1.19-1.88),IGT_MetS 组的危险比为 1.97(95% CI,1.58-2.47)。敏感性分析显示,与 NGT_non_MetS 组相比,IGT_non_MetS 组和 IGT_MetS 组的危险比显示出更高的全因死亡风险、心肌梗死事件或心肌梗死死亡率以及中风事件或中风死亡率:结论:IGT_non_MetS 会增加心血管死亡和心血管事件的风险。结论:IGT_non_MetS 会增加心血管死亡和心血管事件的风险,而且当它与 MetS 同时发生时,会进一步增加心血管死亡和心血管事件的风险。这表明需要进行积极干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Influence of impaired glucose tolerance alone and combined with metabolic syndrome on long-term risk of cardiovascular events and mortality

Influence of impaired glucose tolerance alone and combined with metabolic syndrome on long-term risk of cardiovascular events and mortality

Background

This study aimed to investigate the potential differences in the influence of impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) with and without metabolic syndrome (MetS) on cardiovascular (CV) events and mortality.

Methods

Participants having IGT with MetS (IGT_MetS), those having IGT without MetS (IGT_non_MetS), and those having normal glucose tolerance (NGT) without MetS (NGT_non_MetS) (N = 246, N = 294, and N = 471, respectively) were included in this study. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to examine the relationship among these three groups and CV events and mortality.

Results

Over the 30-year follow-up period, 57 (12.1%) participants having NGT_non_MetS, 55 (18.71%) with IGT_non_MetS, and 74 (30.08%) with IGT_MetS experienced CV mortality. After adjusting for risk factors, the hazard ratios for CV mortality were 2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38–2.91) for the IGT_non_MetS group and 2.96 (95% CI, 2.09–4.19) for the IGT_MetS group, compared with the NGT_non_MetS group. Similar patterns were observed for CV events, with hazard ratios of 1.49 (95% CI, 1.19–1.88) for the IGT_non_MetS group and 1.97 (95% CI, 1.58–2.47) for the IGT_MetS group. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the hazard ratios of the IGT_non_MetS and IGT_MetS groups indicated a higher risk of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction events or myocardial infarction mortality, and stroke events or stroke mortality compared with that of the NGT_non_MetS group.

Conclusion

IGT_non_MetS increased the risk of CV mortality and events. Furthermore, when it occurred in conjunction with MetS, it further increased the risk of CV mortality and events. This suggested that active intervention is required.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Diabetes
Journal of Diabetes ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.20%
发文量
94
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Diabetes (JDB) devotes itself to diabetes research, therapeutics, and education. It aims to involve researchers and practitioners in a dialogue between East and West via all aspects of epidemiology, etiology, pathogenesis, management, complications and prevention of diabetes, including the molecular, biochemical, and physiological aspects of diabetes. The Editorial team is international with a unique mix of Asian and Western participation. The Editors welcome submissions in form of original research articles, images, novel case reports and correspondence, and will solicit reviews, point-counterpoint, commentaries, editorials, news highlights, and educational content.
×
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