4.7 Article

Diabetes mellitus increases short-term mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0735-1097(02)01969-1

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to determine the impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) on short-term mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery, (CABG). BACKGROUND Diabetes mellitus is present in approximately 20% to 30% of patients undergoing CABG, and the impact of diabetes on short-term outcome is unclear. METHODS We performed a retrospective cohort study in 434 hospitals from North America. The study population included 146,786 patients undergoing CABG during 1997: 41,663 patients with DM and 105,123 without DM. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital morbidity, infections and composite outcomes of mortality or morbidity and mortality or infection. RESULTS The 30-day mortality was 3.7% in patients with DM and 2.7% in those without DM; the unadjusted odds ratio was 1.40 (95% confidence interval [Cl], 1.31 to 1.49). After adjusting for other baseline risk factors, the overall adjusted odds ratio for diabetics was 1.23 (95% Cl, 1.15 to 1.32). Patients treated with oral hypoglycemic medications had adjusted odds ratio 1.13; 95% Cl, 1.04 to 1.23, whereas those on insulin had an adjusted odds ratio 1.39; 95% CI, 1.27 to 1.52. Morbidity, infections and the composite outcomes occurred more commonly in diabetic patients and were associated with an adjusted risk about 35% higher in diabetics than nondiabetics, particularly among insulin-treated diabetics (adjusted risk between 1.5 to 1.61). CONCLUSIONS Diabetes mellitus is an important risk factor for mortality and morbidity anion, those undergoing CABG. Research is needed to determine if goods control of glucose levels during the perioperative time period improves outcome. (C) 2002 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

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

4.7
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