Search

Background: Current guidelines recommend surgical revascularization (coronary artery bypass graft [CABG]) over percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease. Few data are available describing revascularization patterns among these patients in the setting of non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction.Methods and Results: Using Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get with the Guidelines (ACTION Registry-GWTG), we compared the in-hospital use of different revascularization strategies (PCI versus CABG versus no revascularization) in diabetes mellitus patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction who had angiography, demonstrating multivessel coronary artery disease between July 2008 and December 2014. Factors associated with use of CABG versus PCI were identified using logistic multivariable regression analyses. A total of 29 769 patients from 539 hospitals were included in the study, of which 10 852 (36.4%) were treated with CABG, 13 760 (46.2%) were treated with PCI, and 5157 (17.3%) were treated without revascularization. The overall use of revascularization increased over the study period with an increase in the proportion undergoing PCI (45% to 48.9%; Ptrend=0.0002) and no change in the proportion undergoing CABG (36.1% to 34.7%; ptrend=0.88). There was significant variability between participating hospitals in the use of PCI and CABG (range: 22%-100%; 0%-78%, respectively; P value <0.0001 for both). Patient-level, but not hospital-level, characteristics were statistically associated with the use of PCI versus CABG, including anatomic severity of the disease, early treatment of adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonists at presentation, older age, female sex, and history of heart failure.Conclusions: Among patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease presenting with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, only one third undergo CABG during the index admission. Furthermore, the use of PCI, but not CABG, increased modestly over the past 6 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Metabolic syndrome (MetSyn) is associated with increased cardiovascular risk in the general population. Its prognostic implications are less well defined in patients with coronary artery disease. Methods and Results: We analyzed patients in the Duke Database for Cardiovascular Disease with a diagnosis of incident obstructive coronary artery disease. Diabetes mellitus (DM) was classified as a clinical history of DM, use of hypoglycemic drugs, or fasting glucose of >or=126 mg/dL. MetSyn was defined as having 3 of 5 characteristics: fasting glucose >or=100 and <126 mg/dL, low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (men, <40 mg/dL; women, <50 mg/dL), triglycerides >150 mg/dL, blood pressure >or=130/85 mm Hg, or use of antihypertensive therapy, or body mass index >or=27. Death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was assessed at 6 months, 1 year, then annually. Cox proportional hazards models were generated to compare mortality and cardiovascular events between groups. The primary cohort consisted of 5744 patients; 1831 (31.9%) had DM, 2491 (43.4%) had MetSyn, and 1422 (24.7%) had no DM/MetSyn. Median follow-up was 5 years. Compared with no DM/MetSyn patients, DM patients had a higher adjusted risk for mortality (hazard ratio, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.28 to 1.69) but MetSyn patients did not (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.08). Similar results were found for the combined end points of death or myocardial infarction, and death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Conclusions: In a population of consecutive patients with a new diagnosis of coronary artery disease by angiography, MetSyn without DM was not an independent predictor of mortality or cardiovascular events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aims of this study were to investigate the prognostic influence of diabetes after an episode of unstable angina pectoris or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI) and to investigate whether diabetes is independently associated with increased short- and long-term mortality risk following these episodes.Design: Consecutive patients with a diagnosis of unstable angina pectoris or non-Q-wave MI, admitted to the Coronary Care Unit at Ostra Hospital, Göteborg, Sweden during 1988-1998 were included. The primary endpoint was 2-year mortality collected from the Swedish cause-specific mortality register.Results: The study included 4341 patients, 722 (17%) had diabetes. Diabetes was associated with increased mortality during initial hospitalization (10.2% vs 5.7%, p < 0.0001), after 30 days (13% vs 7.5%, p < 0.0001), and at 2 years (33.7% vs 20.2%, p < 0.0001). After adjustment for potentially confounding factors, diabetes remained an independent predictor of 2-year mortality following unstable coronary syndromes, the hazard ratio (HR) of death (HR = 1.6; 95% CI 1.4-1.9).Conclusions: Among patients with unstable coronary syndromes, diabetes is an independent risk factor associated with increased mortality during hospitalization, short- and long-term follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE--To evaluate the relationship between A1C and glucose therapy intensification (GTI) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSdA1C was measured as part of routine care (clinical A1C) or in the core laboratory (laboratory A1C, results unavailable to clinicians). GTI predictors were identified using hierarchical Poisson regression. RESULTS--Of 1,274 patients, 886 (70%) had clinical A1C and an additional 263 had laboratory A1C measured. Overall, A1C was <7% in 419 (37%), 7-9% in 415 (36%), and >9% in 315 patients (27%). GTI occurred in 31% of patients and was more frequent in those with clinical A1C both before (34 vs. 24%, P < 0.001) and after multivariable adjustment (relative risk 1.34 [95% CI 1.12-1.62] vs. no clinical A1C). CONCLUSIONS--Long-term glucose control is poor in most AMI patients with DM, but only a inority of patients undergo GTI at discharge. Inpatient A1C assessment is strongly associated with intensification of glucose-lowering therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor evacetrapib substantially raises the high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol level, reduces the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level, and enhances cellular cholesterol efflux capacity. We sought to determine the effect of evacetrapib on major adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with high-risk vascular disease.Methods: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, we enrolled 12,092 patients who had at least one of the following conditions: an acute coronary syndrome within the previous 30 to 365 days, cerebrovascular atherosclerotic disease, peripheral vascular arterial disease, or diabetes mellitus with coronary artery disease. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either evacetrapib at a dose of 130 mg or matching placebo, administered daily, in addition to standard medical therapy. The primary efficacy end point was the first occurrence of any component of the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina.Results: At 3 months, a 31.1% decrease in the mean LDL cholesterol level was observed with evacetrapib versus a 6.0% increase with placebo, and a 133.2% increase in the mean HDL cholesterol level was seen with evacetrapib versus a 1.6% increase with placebo. After 1363 of the planned 1670 primary end-point events had occurred, the data and safety monitoring board recommended that the trial be terminated early because of a lack of efficacy. After a median of 26 months of evacetrapib or placebo, a primary end-point event occurred in 12.9% of the patients in the evacetrapib group and in 12.8% of those in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.91 to 1.11; P=0.91).Conclusions: Although the cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor evacetrapib had favorable effects on established lipid biomarkers, treatment with evacetrapib did not result in a lower rate of cardiovascular events than placebo among patients with high-risk vascular disease. (Funded by Eli Lilly; ACCELERATE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01687998 .). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study sought to examine the efficacy of ranolazine versus placebo on weekly angina frequency and sublingual nitroglycerin use in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease (CAD), and chronic stable angina who remain symptomatic despite treatment with up to 2 antianginal agents. Background: Patients with diabetes have more extensive CAD than those without diabetes, and a high burden of angina. Ranolazine is not only effective in treating angina but also may improve glycemic control, thus providing several potential benefits in this high-risk group. We conducted a randomized trial to test the antianginal benefit of ranolazine in patients with diabetes and stable angina. Methods: TERISA (Type 2 Diabetes Evaluation of Ranolazine in Subjects With Chronic Stable Angina) was an international, randomized, double-blind trial of ranolazine versus placebo in patients with diabetes, CAD, and stable angina treated with 1 to 2 antianginals. After a single-blind, 4-week placebo run-in, patients were randomized to 8 weeks of double-blind ranolazine (target dose 1000 mg bid) or placebo. Anginal episodes and nitroglycerin use were recorded with daily entry into a novel electronic diary. Primary outcome was the average weekly number of anginal episodes over the last 6 weeks of the study. Results: A total of 949 patients were randomized across 104 centers in 14 countries. Mean age was 64 years, 61% were men, mean diabetes duration was 7.5 years, and mean baseline HbA1c was 7.3%. Electronic diary data capture was 98% in both groups. Weekly angina frequency was significantly lower with ranolazine versus placebo (3.8 [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.6 to 4.1] episodes vs. 4.3 [95% CI: 4.0 to 4.5] episodes, p = 0.008), as was the weekly sublingual nitroglycerin use (1.7 [95% CI: 1.6 to 1.9] doses vs. 2.1 [95% CI: 1.9 to 2.3] doses, p = 0.003). There was no difference in the incidence of serious adverse events between groups. Conclusions: Among patients with diabetes and chronic angina despite treatment with up to 2 agents, ranolazine reduced angina and sublingual nitroglycerin use and was well tolerated. (Type 2 Diabetes Evaluation of Ranolazine in Subjects With Chronic Stable Angina [TERISA]; NCT01425359) [Copyright &y& Elsevier]