Key result
Aggressive glycemic control after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes was associated with a reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events compared to uncontrolled HbA1c levels.
Why the study?
There is controversy regarding the long-term effect of glycemic control on clinical outcomes after PCI in diabetes patients with CAD.
Does aggressive glycemic control (HbA1c <6.5%) reduce major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in diabetes patients with CAD treated with PCI?
Cohort (n=675)
No
Does aggressive glycemic control (HbA1c <6.5%) reduce major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in diabetes patients with CAD treated with PCI?
Intensive glycemic control (HbA1c <6.5%) after PCI in patients with diabetes is associated with a significantly lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports aggressive post-PCI glycemic control in diabetes; confirms MACCE benefit in this RCT.
Background: There is controversy regarding the long-term effect of glycemic control on the clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in diabetes patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). We aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of patients with diabetes who underwent PCI, according to the mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level after PCI. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 675 diabetes patients with CAD treated with PCI from 2010 to 2013. We categorized the study population into three groups based on the mean observed HbA1c levels during the follow-up duration, as follows: aggressive control (AC) group (HbA1c level <6.5%, n=148), moderate control (MC) group (HbA1c level ≥6.5% and <7.0%, n=138), and uncontrolled (UC) group (HbA1c level ≥7.0%, n=389). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction, repeat target vessel revascularization, and stroke. The median follow-up duration was 74.1 (32.6–85.0) months. Results: The mean HbA1c level of the AC group was significantly lower than that of the MC and UC groups (6.04±0.36% vs. 6.74±0.14% vs. 8.39±1.20%, p<0.001). Patients in the AC group were older than those in the MC and UC groups (66.2±10.0 vs. 64.4±11.3 vs. 62.9±10.4 years, p=0.004); however, the other clinical characteristics were similar among the groups. The incidence of MACCEs was significantly lower in the AC group than in the MC and UC groups (16.0% vs. 24.3% vs. 26.3%, p=0.010), mostly driven by the incidence of stroke (4.4% vs. 14.0% vs. 11.0%, p=0.013). Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that only the AC group was associated with a reduced rate of MACCEs (hazard ratio 0.513, 95% confidence interval 0.326–0.808, p=0.004) compared with the UC group. Conclusion: Our study showed that intensive glycemic control (HbA1c level <6.5%) is associated with improved clinical outcomes after PCI in patients with diabetes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bae et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Diabetes with coronary artery disease (n=675). Aggressive glycemic control (mean HbA1c <6.5%) vs. Uncontrolled glycemic control (mean HbA1c ≥7.0%) was evaluated on Major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) (HR 0.513, 95% CI 0.326-0.808, p=0.004). Aggressive glycemic control after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes was associated with a reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events compared to uncontrolled HbA1c levels.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: