4.5 Article

Subclinical LV dysfunction and 10-year outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Journal

HEART
Volume 101, Issue 13, Pages 1061-1066

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2014-307391

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia [993601]
  2. Private Practice Trust Fund, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, Australia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective New imaging techniques have permitted the detection of subclinical LV dysfunction (LVD) in up to half of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) with a normal EF. However, the connection between early LVD and prognosis is unclear. This study aimed to define the long-term outcome of LVD associated with type 2 DM. Methods In this prospective cohort study, 230 asymptomatic patients with type 2 DM underwent measurement of global longitudinal 2D strain (GLS) for detection of LVD and were followed for up to 10 years. All subjects had normal EF (>= 50%) and no evidence of coronary artery disease at recruitment. Outcome data were obtained through centralised state-wide death and hospital admission registries. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality and hospitalisation. Results On study entry, almost half (45%) of the cohort had evidence of LVD as detected by GLS. Over a median follow-up of 7.4 +/- 2.6 years (range 0.6-9.7 years), 68 patients (30%) met the primary endpoint (LVD: 37%; normal LV function: 24%). GLS was independently associated with the primary endpoint (HR=1.10; p=0.04), as was systolic blood pressure (HR=1.02; p<0.001) and levels of glycosylated haemoglobin (HR=1.28; p=0.011). Patients with LVD had significantly worse outcome than those without (chi(2)=4.73; p=0.030). Conclusions Subclinical LVD is common in asymptomatic patients with type 2 DM, is readily detectable by GLS imaging and is independently associated with adverse outcome.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available