Why the study?
Even after successful primary PCI for STEMI, no-reflow phenomenon can develop and lead to adverse events, motivating evaluation of its relationship with the HbA1c/C-peptide ratio.
Is the HbA1c/C-peptide ratio associated with the no-reflow phenomenon in patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI?
Is the HbA1c/C-peptide ratio associated with the no-reflow phenomenon in patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI?
The HbA1c/C-peptide ratio is an independent predictor of the no-reflow phenomenon in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI, offering a potential tool for risk stratification.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support HCR for no-reflow risk stratification in STEMI PCI; leaves open prospective validation and therapeutic implications.
Currently, the gold standard treatment for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), but even after successful pPCI, a perfusion disorder in the epicardial coronary arteries, termed no-reflow phenomenon (NR), can develop, resulting in short- and long-term adverse events. The present study assessed the relationship between NR and HbA1c/C-peptide ratio (HCR) in 1834 consecutive patients who underwent pPCI due to STEMI. Participants were divided into two groups according to NR status and the demographic, clinical and periprocedural characteristics of the groups were compared. NR developed in 352 (19.1%) of the patients in the study. While C-peptide levels were significantly lower in the NR group, HbA1c and HCR were significantly higher ( P < .001, for all). In multivariable analysis, C-peptide, HbA1c, and HCR, were determined as independent predictors for NR ( P < .05, for all). In Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis, HCR predicted the NR with 80% specificity and 77% sensitivity. In STEMI patients, combining HbA1c and C-peptide in a single fraction has a predictive value for NR independent of diabetes. This ratio may contribute to risk stratification of STEMI patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Toprak et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: