Key result
Combined SHR and glycemic variability stratifies 1-year MI mortality, identifying the highest risk NSTEMI subgroup.
Why the study?
Prior evaluations of stress hyperglycemia ratio and glycemic variability rarely accounted for underlying glucose metabolic phenotypes, potentially obscuring their prognostic utility across MI subtypes.
Do stress hyperglycemia ratio and glycemic variability predict 1-year all-cause mortality in patients with NSTEMI and STEMI?
Cohort (n=4,453)
No
Do stress hyperglycemia ratio and glycemic variability predict 1-year all-cause mortality in patients with NSTEMI and STEMI?
Integrating stress hyperglycemia ratio and glycemic variability refines 1-year mortality prediction in MI patients, highlighting a high-risk 'high GluCV + low SHR' phenotype in NSTEMI.
Background: Precise risk stratification in myocardial infarction (MI) remains challenging, particularly when integrating acute dysglycemia with chronic metabolic status. Prior evaluations of stress hyperglycemia ratio (SHR) and glycemic variability (GluCV) have seldom accounted for underlying glucose metabolic phenotypes, potentially obscuring their prognostic utility in distinct MI subtypes. Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, we identified 3628 non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and 825 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care IV (MIMIC-IV) database. Participants were stratified by glycemic status: normal glucose regulation (NGR), pre-diabetes (Pre-DM), and diabetes mellitus (DM). We assessed the individual and combined prognostic value of SHR and GluCV for one-year all-cause mortality. Machine learning (ML) models were subsequently developed to optimize risk prediction. Results: The combination of SHR and GluCV effectively stratified mortality risk across all glycemic phenotypes in both NSTEMI and STEMI patients. Notably, within NSTEMI cohorts, the subgroup characterized by both high GluCV and low SHR exhibited the poorest survival. In comparative analyses, GluCV demonstrated superior prognostic performance over SHR for NSTEMI outcomes. Among five ML algorithms tested, the Random Forest model achieved the highest predictive accuracy [NGR (area under the curve (AUC): 0.885, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.882-0.888), Pre-DM (AUC: 0.854, 95% CI: 0.85-0.857), DM (AUC: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.868-0.871)], with GluCV consistently identified as a top-ranking feature. Conclusions: By concurrently evaluating SHR and GluCV within a glycemic stratification framework, this study refines mortality prediction in MI patients. Our findings advocate for a shift from uniform glycemic targets to phenotype-specific management strategies. The developed ML tool offers a practical approach for individualized risk assessment in clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hu et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI) and ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) (n=4,453). Stress hyperglycemia ratio (SHR) and glycemic variability (GluCV) vs. Lower tertiles of SHR and GluCV was evaluated on 1-year all-cause mortality. Combined assessment of stress hyperglycemia ratio and glycemic variability effectively stratified 1-year mortality risk in MI patients, with high glycemic variability and low stress hyperglycemia ratio identifying the highest risk NSTEMI subgroup.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: