Key result
Higher glycaemic variability is not associated with increased 1-year mortality, stroke, or reinfarction risk.
Why the study?
Hyperglycaemia during AMI hospitalization is a risk predictor, but the impact of glycaemic variability on prognosis in T2DM patients treated with insulin is unclear.
Does increased glycaemic variability predict cardiovascular complications or mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction and treated with insulin infusion?
Cohort (n=578)
Does increased glycaemic variability predict cardiovascular complications or mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction and treated with insulin infusion?
Glycaemic variability during the first 48 hours of insulin infusion for acute myocardial infarction does not significantly predict 1-year mortality, reinfarction, or stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Does not support glycaemic variability for post-MI risk stratification; leaves open glucose control targets in ACS.
AIMS: Hyperglycaemia during hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a risk predictor, but attempts to improve the prognosis by insulin-based glucose control have not been consistently successful. Increased glycaemic variability, a potential effect of insulin treatment, has been linked to a worse prognosis in critically ill patients. The present aim was to study the possibility of such a relation in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and AMI. METHOD AND RESULTS: We studied 578 T2DM patients who had glucose levels measured hourly while receiving an insulin-glucose infusion during the first 48 h of hospitalization for AMI. Three measures of glycaemic variability: root mean square error (RMSE), range, and slope were studied in relation to a composite endpoint of mortality, stroke, and reinfarction and to mortality. In unadjusted analyses, the mean level of glycaemic variability did not differ between patients who died during 12 months of follow-up compared with those who survived. In a Cox regression model adjusting for age and previous congestive heart failure, there was no increased risk for the composite endpoint associated with increased glycaemic variability; RMSE: hazard ratio (HR) 1.09 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93-1.27; P = 0.28], range: HR 1.01 (95% CI: 0.98-1.05; P = 0.47), and slope: HR 1.01 (95% CI: 0.99-1.04; P = 0.40). There was furthermore no increased risk in mortality; RMSE HR 1.14 (95% CI: 0.93-1.38; P = 0.21), range HR 1.03 (95% CI: 0.98-1.08; P = 0.28), and slope HR 1.01 (95% CI: 0.98-1.04; P = 0.55). CONCLUSION: The 1-year risk for death, reinfarction, or stroke did not relate to glycaemic variability in T2DM patients with AMI treated with insulin infusion.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mellbin et al. (2012) conducted a cohort in Acute myocardial infarction and type 2 diabetes (n=578). Glycaemic variability (measured by root mean square error, range, and slope) was evaluated on Composite endpoint of mortality, stroke, and reinfarction (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.93-1.27, p=0.28). Increased glycaemic variability (RMSE) was not associated with an increased risk of 1-year mortality, stroke, or reinfarction (HR 1.09; 95% CI 0.93-1.27; P=0.28).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: