Search

Background: Previous studies suggest that among patients with stable coronary artery disease, patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have less angina and more silent ischemia when compared with those without DM. However, the burden of angina in diabetic versus nondiabetic patients after elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not been recently examined.Methods and Results: In a 10-site US PCI registry, we assessed angina before and at 1, 6, and 12 months after elective PCI with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire angina frequency score (range, 0-100, higher=better). We also examined the rates of antianginal medication prescriptions at discharge. A multivariable, repeated-measures Poisson model was used to examine the independent association of DM with angina over the year after treatment. Among 1080 elective PCI patients (mean age, 65 years; 74.7% men), 34.0% had DM. At baseline and at each follow-up, patients with DM had similar angina prevalence and severity as those without DM. Patients with DM were more commonly prescribed calcium channel blockers and long-acting nitrates at discharge (DM versus not: 27.9% versus 20.9% [P=0.01] and 32.8% versus 25.5% [P=0.01], respectively), whereas β-blockers and ranolazine were prescribed at similar rates. In the multivariable, repeated-measures model, the risk of angina was similar over the year after PCI in patients with versus without DM (relative risk, 1.04; range, 0.80-1.36).Conclusions: Patients with stable coronary artery disease and DM exhibit a burden of angina that is at least as high as those without DM despite more antianginal prescriptions at discharge. These findings contradict the conventional teachings that patients with DM experience less angina because of silent ischemia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evidence from large randomized clinical trials supports the benefit of SGLT2i (sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors) to improve cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes with or at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or chronic kidney disease. Considering this evidence, which has been expanding since the product label indication for empagliflozin to reduce risk of cardiovascular death in 2016, clinician-level variation in the prescription of SGLT2i among US Medicare beneficiaries was evaluated.Methods: Antihyperglycemic medication prescribers were identified as those physicians and advanced practice providers prescribing metformin in Medicare part D prescriber data. In this cross-sectional study, the proportion prescribing SGLT2i was assessed overall and across specialties in 2018, with changes assessed from 2014 to 2018. SGLT2i use was compared with other second-line antihyperglycemic medication classes, sulfonylureas and DPP4is (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors).Results: Among 232 523 unique clinicians who prescribed metformin for Medicare beneficiaries in 2018 (diabetes-treating clinicians), 45 255 (19.5%) prescribed SGLT2i. There was substantial variation across specialties-from 72% of endocrinologists to 14% of cardiologists who prescribed metformin also prescribed SGLT2i. Between 2014 and 2018, the number prescribing SGLT2i increased 5-fold from 9048 in 2014 to 45 255 in 2018. Among clinicians who prescribed both sulfonylureas and SGLT2i in 2018, SGLT2i was prescribed to a median 33 beneficiaries for every 100 prescribed sulfonylureas (interquartile range, 18-67). SGLT2i use relative to sulfonylureas increased from 19 (interquartile range, 11-34) per 100 in 2014 to 33 (interquartile range, 18-67) per 100 in 2018 (Ptrend<0.001).Conclusions: Eighty percent of clinicians prescribing metformin to Medicare beneficiaries did not prescribe SGLT2i in 2018. Moreover, sulfonylureas prescriptions were 3 times more frequent than those of SGLT2is, although a pattern of increasing uptake may portend future trends. These findings highlight a baseline opportunity to improve care and outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although patients with diabetes mellitus experience high rates of adverse events after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), including death and recurrent ischemia, some diabetic patients are likely at low risk, whereas others are at high risk. We sought to develop prediction models to stratify risk after AMI in patients with diabetes mellitus.Methods and Results: We developed prediction models for long-term mortality and angina among 1613 patients with diabetes mellitus discharged alive after AMI from 24 US hospitals and then validated the models in a separate, multicenter registry of 786 patients with diabetes mellitus. Event rates in the derivation cohort were 27% for 5-year mortality and 27% for 1-year angina. Parsimonious prediction models demonstrated good discrimination (c-indices=0.78 and 0.69, respectively) and excellent calibration. Within the context of the predictors we estimated, the strongest predictors for mortality were higher creatinine, not working at the time of the AMI, older age, lower hemoglobin, left ventricular dysfunction, and chronic heart failure. The strongest predictors for angina were angina burden in the 4 weeks before the AMI, younger age, history of prior coronary bypass graft surgery, and non-white race. The lowest and highest deciles of predicted risk ranged from 4% to 80% for mortality and 12% to 59% for angina. The models also performed well in external validation (c-indices=0.78 and 0.73, respectively).Conclusions: We found a wide range of risk for adverse outcomes after AMI in diabetic patients. Predictive models can identify patients with diabetes mellitus for whom closer follow-up and aggressive secondary prevention strategies should be considered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

The article presents a study on recent trends in hospital mortality for patients with myocardial infarction (MI) according to diabetes mellitus (DM) status from 1994-2006. It analyzed data from the U.S. National Registry of Myocardial Infarction, representing a fourth of all U.S. acute care hospitals. It finds that the hospital mortality gap between MI patients with and without DM narrowed significantly within the period, with the greatest improvement seen in women with DM.

Background: Among individuals without diabetes, elevated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) has been associated with increased morbidity and mortality, but the literature is sparse regarding the prognostic importance of low HbA1c.Methods and Results: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III (NHANES III) participants, 20 years and older, were followed up to 12 years (median follow-up, 8.8 years) for all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between HbA1c levels and all-cause mortality for 14 099 participants without diabetes. There were 1825 deaths during the follow-up period. Participants with a low HbA1c (<4.0%) had the highest levels of mean red blood cell volume, ferritin, and liver enzymes and the lowest levels of mean total cholesterol and diastolic blood pressure compared with their counterparts with HbA1c levels between 4.0% and 6.4%. An HbA1c <4.0% versus 5.0% to 5.4% was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 3.73; 95% CI, 1.45 to 9.63) after adjustment for age, race-ethnicity, and sex. This association was attenuated but remained statistically significant after further multivariable adjustment for lifestyle, cardiovascular factors, metabolic factors, red blood cell indices, iron storage indices, and liver function indices (HR, 2.90; 95% CI, 1.25 to 6.76).Conclusions: In this nationally representative cohort, low HbA1c was associated with increased all-cause mortality among US adults without diabetes. Additional research is needed to confirm these results and identify potential mechanisms that may be underlying this association. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Diabetes mellitus is a major public health problem in the United States. We assess the prevalence of diabetes in Dallas County, quantify the association between diabetes and subclinical cardiovascular disease, and assess the use of evidence-based cardiovascular disease risk-modifying therapies. Methods: This study uses data from 3392 participants aged 30 to 65 years from the Dallas Heart Study, a probability-based, multiethnic sample of residents living in Dallas County, Texas. Three primary outcomes were examined: (1) diabetes prevalence, (2) adjusted odds ratios for detectable coronary calcium stratified by diabetes diagnosis status, and (3) rates of use of evidence-based cardiovascular disease risk-modifying therapies among subjects with diabetes stratified by diabetes diagnosis status. Results: The estimated prevalence of diabetes in Dallas County was 7.8%, with >40% of diabetic patients undiagnosed before participation in the Dallas Heart Study. Both previously diagnosed and previously undiagnosed diabetes were independently associated with the presence of coronary artery calcium (diagnosed: OR 3.55, 95% CI 1.56-8.05) (undiagnosed: OR 2.98, 95% CI 1.39-6.39). The rates of use of aspirin, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and statins were suboptimal, and blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets were rarely met, especially among subjects with previously undiagnosed diabetes. Conclusions: Diabetes is prevalent and is associated with subclinical cardiovascular disease; this association is present even at the time of diagnosis. Despite the cardiovascular risk associated with diabetes, evidence-based risk-modifying therapies continue to be underused, and therapeutic targets remain unmet, especially among people unaware of their diabetes diagnosis. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article presents a study on the tetrahydrocannabinol-induced disruption in the U.S. It evaluates the time perception of self-timed actions of the drug. It examines the hypothesis on the disruption of tetrahydrocannabinol. It also notes that the research was approved by the Joint Institute of Psychiatry and Maudsley Hospital Ethics Committee.