Why the study?
Does early revascularization improve 1-year mortality in diabetic patients with cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction compared to initial medical stabilization?
Does early revascularization improve 1-year mortality in diabetic patients with cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction compared to initial medical stabilization?
Diabetes mellitus is not an independent predictor of 1-year mortality in cardiogenic shock complicating AMI, and diabetic patients derive a similar survival benefit from early revascularization as non-diabetic patients.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Early revascularization may confer similar benefit regardless of diabetes in AMI cardiogenic shock; leaves open independent prognostic role and requires randomized confirmation.
BACKGROUND: The role of diabetes mellitus (DM) in cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is not well understood. Previous studies have reported an in-hospital mortality rate for patients with DM and CS of about 60%. OBJECTIVES: This study compares the 1-year mortality rates of patients with DM and those without (NDM) and evaluates early revascularization (ERV) compared with initial medical stabilization (IMS) in patients with DM and CS. METHODS: Baseline characteristics, clinical and hemodynamic measures, and management were compared for 90 patients (31%) with DM and 198 with NDM (69%) who were randomized to ERV or IMS in the SHOCK Trial. RESULTS: When compared with NDM, patients with DM were of similar age but had higher rates of prior MI (44.4 vs. 27.8%, p = 0.007) and hypertension (56.2 vs. 42.5%, p = 0.04). The DM group had a lower rate of fibrinolytic therapy (44.4 vs. 60.1%, p = 0.02). In patients randomized to ERV, patients with DM had a higher rate of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (50.0 vs. 30.9%, p = 0.03) despite similar rates of triple-vessel disease. The 1-year mortality rates in both groups were equivalent (58.9%). One-year mortality was not associated with diabetes (hazard ratio [HR] 1.02, 95% CI, 0.73-1.42, p = 0.91). The benefit of an ERV strategy was similar (HR [DM] 0.62; HR [NDM] 0.75, p = 0.58). Even after adjusting for the imbalance in CABG rates, 1-year mortality was not associated with DM. CONCLUSION: Diabetes mellitus is not a predictor of 1-year mortality in CS after AMI. The benefit from an ERV strategy is similar for DM and NDM. The management strategies and influence of DM on mortality in CS deserve further evaluation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Farkouh et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: