Why the study?
Does treatment targeted to attenuate insulin resistance or early revascularization reduce mortality, morbidity, and progression of coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes and stable cardiac symptoms?
Does treatment targeted to attenuate insulin resistance or early revascularization reduce mortality, morbidity, and progression of coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes and stable cardiac symptoms?
The BARI 2D trial is designed to address whether insulin sensitization and early revascularization improve outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and stable coronary artery disease.
Leaves optimal strategy for stable CAD in diabetes unresolved; BARI 2D results needed to guide insulin sensitization and revascularization.
A paradoxical increase in mortality attributable to diabetes has occurred, particularly during the last decade, despite the overall decrease in mortality attributable to coronary artery disease in patients without diabetes. Insulin resistance with or without frank type 2 diabetes has emerged as a major determinant of accelerated coronary artery disease and its sequelae. The advent of insulin sensitizers enables clinicians to target treatment of insulin resistance, as well as hyperglycemia and dyslipidemia. The prevalence of diabetes in the United States is enormous and is increasing rapidly. Patients with diabetes respond less favorably to percutaneous coronary interventions and surgery compared with nondiabetic patients. These considerations led to the initiation of the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial. It is designed to determine whether treatment targeted to attenuate insulin resistance can arrest or retard progression of coronary artery disease compared with treatment targeted to the same level of glycemic control with an insulin-providing approach. It is designed also to determine whether early revascularization reduces mortality and morbidity in patients with type 2 diabetes whose cardiac symptoms are mild and stable. Despite challenges in study design and enrollment, intensive follow-up, and the long duration of follow-up planned, the questions being addressed are compelling and seem to merit the effort.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sobel et al. (2003) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: