BACKGROUND:Diabetic patients are at increased risk for heart failure (HF) and other adverse events after myocardial infarction (MI). Left ventricular (LV) enlargement after MI is also associated with the same increased risk. We used data from the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement (SAVE) echocardiographic substudy to test the hypothesis that diabetes was associated with increased LV enlargement after MI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Four hundred twelve nondiabetic and 100 diabetic patients underwent echocardiographic assessment at baseline and 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years after MI. HF developed in 30% of diabetic and 17% of nondiabetic patients during follow-up (P<0.001). Baseline LV diastolic size, ejection fraction, and infarct segment length were similar between diabetic and nondiabetic patients. Diabetic patients demonstrated less LV enlargement between baseline and 2 years than nondiabetic patients (0.9+/-11.1 cm2 versus 3.8+/-10.9 cm2, P=0.047). In patients who developed HF, LV diastolic dilatation (10.0+/-12.4 cm2 versus 3.7+/-13.1 cm2, P=0.06) and systolic dilatation (4.6+/-11.8 versus 0.91+/-12.1, P=0.017) were greater in nondiabetic than in diabetic patients. LV dilatation between baseline and 2 years was a predictor of HF in nondiabetic patients, but not in diabetic patients, even after excluding patients with recurrent MI and adjusting for history of hypertension, prior MI, age, treatment group, and smoking. Diabetes modified the relationship between ventricular enlargement and the risk of HF (P=0.011). CONCLUSIONS: The increased incidence of HF after MI in diabetic patients is not explained by a greater propensity for LV remodeling.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Diabeticpatients are at increased risk for heart failure (HF) and other adverse events after myocardial infarction (MI). Left ventricular (LV) enlargement after MI is also associated with the same increased risk. We used data from the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement (SAVE) echocardiographic substudy to test the hypothesis that diabetes was associated with increased LV enlargement after MI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Four hundred twelve nondiabetic and 100 diabeticpatients underwent echocardiographic assessment at baseline and 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years after MI. HF developed in 30% of diabetic and 17% of nondiabetic patients during follow-up (P<0.001). Baseline LV diastolic size, ejection fraction, and infarct segment length were similar between diabetic and nondiabetic patients. Diabeticpatients demonstrated less LV enlargement between baseline and 2 years than nondiabetic patients (0.9+/-11.1 cm2 versus 3.8+/-10.9 cm2, P=0.047). In patients who developed HF, LV diastolic dilatation (10.0+/-12.4 cm2 versus 3.7+/-13.1 cm2, P=0.06) and systolic dilatation (4.6+/-11.8 versus 0.91+/-12.1, P=0.017) were greater in nondiabetic than in diabeticpatients. LV dilatation between baseline and 2 years was a predictor of HF in nondiabetic patients, but not in diabeticpatients, even after excluding patients with recurrent MI and adjusting for history of hypertension, prior MI, age, treatment group, and smoking. Diabetes modified the relationship between ventricular enlargement and the risk of HF (P=0.011). CONCLUSIONS: The increased incidence of HF after MI in diabeticpatients is not explained by a greater propensity for LV remodeling.
Authors: Souad Belmadani; Juan Bernal; Chih-Chang Wei; Manuel A Pallero; Louis Dell'italia; Joanne E Murphy-Ullrich; Kathleen H Berecek Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2007-07-19 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: Kathleen E Dennis; Salisha Hill; Kristie L Rose; Uchechukwu K A Sampson; Michael F Hill Journal: Cardiovasc Pathol Date: 2013-04-06 Impact factor: 2.185
Authors: Boglarka Laczy; Bradford G Hill; Kai Wang; Andrew J Paterson; C Roger White; Dongqi Xing; Yiu-Fai Chen; Victor Darley-Usmar; Suzanne Oparil; John C Chatham Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2008-11-21 Impact factor: 4.733