4.3 Article

Two-Year Clinical Outcomes Between Prediabetic and Diabetic Patients With STEMI and Multivessel Disease Who Underwent Successful PCI Using Drug-Eluting Stents

期刊

ANGIOLOGY
卷 72, 期 1, 页码 50-61

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0003319720949311

关键词

prediabetes; type 2 diabetes; acute myocardial infarction

资金

  1. Research of Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [2016-ER6304-02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel disease (MVD), prediabetes may have a similar impact as diabetes on major clinical outcomes, including an increased risk of all-cause death and cardiovascular events.
To evaluate clinical implication of prediabetes, we compared a 2-year major clinical outcome including patient-oriented composite outcomes (POCOs), stent thrombosis (ST), and stroke between prediabetes and diabetes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel disease (MVD). A total of 4097 patients with STEMI and MVD (normoglycemia [group A: 1001], prediabetes [group B: 1518], and diabetes [group C: 1578]) who received drug-eluting stents were evaluated. Patient-oriented composite outcomes were defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), or any repeat revascularization. The cumulative incidences of POCOs, ST, and stroke were similar between groups B and C. The cumulative incidences of all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.483; 95% CI: 1.027-2.143;P= .036) and all-cause death or MI (aHR: 1.429, 95% CI: 1.034-1.974;P= .031) were higher in group B than in group A. The cumulative incidences of all-cause death (aHR: 1.563; 95% CI: 1.089-2.243;P= .015), cardiac death (aHR: 1.661; 95% CI: 1.123-2.457;P= .011), and all-cause death or MI were higher in group C than in group A. In conclusion, prediabetes could potentially have a similar impact as diabetes on major clinical outcomes in patients with STEMI and MVD.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据