OBJECTIVE: To compare trends in coronary revascularization use and case fatality rate (CFR) following acute myocardial infarction in patients with and without diabetes. METHODS: A retrospective study of 77,552 patients, 20 years of age or older (25% with diabetes), who were hospitalized for a first acute myocardial infarction in the province of Quebec between April 1995 and December 2001 was conducted. Administrative databases were used to identify patients and assess outcomes. RESULTS: Compared with patients without diabetes, patients with diabetes underwent more coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgeries (11.1% versus 8.3%; P<0.0001) but fewer percutaneous coronary interventions (17.1% versus 20.2%; P<0.0001). The use of percutaneous coronary intervention increased substantially over time in both populations, driven mainly by an increase during the index admission (20.6% versus 16.6% per year; P=0.1144 in patients with and without diabetes, respectively). The use of CABG during the index admission increased markedly among patients with diabetes compared with those without (10.3% versus 5.3% per year; P=0.0072); however, at one-year following discharge, CABG use remained stable in patients with diabetes and fell in those without (-0.7% versus -5.3% per year; P=0.2046). Concomitantly, patients with diabetes presented a similar decline in CFR compared with patients without diabetes. The decline was more pronounced during the index admission (-5.0% versus -4.1% per year; P=0.282) than at one-year following discharge (-2.5% versus -2.5% per year; P=0.629) in patients with and without diabetes, respectively. However, fatal outcome remained higher in patients with diabetes than without, with an adjusted RR of 1.21 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.24) at one-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: Overall, coronary revascularization use and CFR improved over time in patients with diabetes. Nevertheless, the mortality rate in patients with diabetes remains higher than in patients without diabetes, indicating that additional progress is required to improve the poorer prognosis in this population.
OBJECTIVE: To compare trends in coronary revascularization use and case fatality rate (CFR) following acute myocardial infarction in patients with and without diabetes. METHODS: A retrospective study of 77,552 patients, 20 years of age or older (25% with diabetes), who were hospitalized for a first acute myocardial infarction in the province of Quebec between April 1995 and December 2001 was conducted. Administrative databases were used to identify patients and assess outcomes. RESULTS: Compared with patients without diabetes, patients with diabetes underwent more coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgeries (11.1% versus 8.3%; P<0.0001) but fewer percutaneous coronary interventions (17.1% versus 20.2%; P<0.0001). The use of percutaneous coronary intervention increased substantially over time in both populations, driven mainly by an increase during the index admission (20.6% versus 16.6% per year; P=0.1144 in patients with and without diabetes, respectively). The use of CABG during the index admission increased markedly among patients with diabetes compared with those without (10.3% versus 5.3% per year; P=0.0072); however, at one-year following discharge, CABG use remained stable in patients with diabetes and fell in those without (-0.7% versus -5.3% per year; P=0.2046). Concomitantly, patients with diabetes presented a similar decline in CFR compared with patients without diabetes. The decline was more pronounced during the index admission (-5.0% versus -4.1% per year; P=0.282) than at one-year following discharge (-2.5% versus -2.5% per year; P=0.629) in patients with and without diabetes, respectively. However, fatal outcome remained higher in patients with diabetes than without, with an adjusted RR of 1.21 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.24) at one-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: Overall, coronary revascularization use and CFR improved over time in patients with diabetes. Nevertheless, the mortality rate in patients with diabetes remains higher than in patients without diabetes, indicating that additional progress is required to improve the poorer prognosis in this population.
Authors: Giuseppina Imperatore; Betsy L Cadwell; Linda Geiss; Jinan B Saadinne; Desmond E Williams; Earl S Ford; Theodore J Thompson; K M Venkat Narayan; Edward W Gregg Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2004-09-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: B Waldecker; W Waas; W Haberbosch; R Voss; M K Steen-Müller; A Hiddessen; R Bretzel; H Tillmanns Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 1999-11 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Helen M Colhoun; D John Betteridge; Paul N Durrington; Graham A Hitman; H Andrew W Neil; Shona J Livingstone; Margaret J Thomason; Michael I Mackness; Valentine Charlton-Menys; John H Fuller Journal: Lancet Date: 2004 Aug 21-27 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Louise Pilote; Patrick Merrett; Igor Karp; David Alter; Peter C Austin; Jafna Cox; Helen Johansen; William Ghali; Jack V Tu Journal: Can J Cardiol Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 5.223
Authors: Victor M G Legrand; Patrick W Serruys; Felix Unger; Ben A van Hout; Mathias C M Vrolix; Geert M P Fransen; Torsten Toftegaard Nielsen; Peter Kildeberg Paulsen; Ricardo Seabra Gomes; João M G de Queiroz e Melo; José P Marques dos Santos Neves; Wietze Lindeboom; Bianca Backx Journal: Circulation Date: 2004-03-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Ana Lopez-de-Andres; Rodrigo Jimenez-Garcia; Valentin Hernandez-Barrera; Isabel Jimenez-Trujillo; Carmen Gallardo-Pino; Angel Gil de Miguel; Pilar Carrasco-Garrido Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-01-15 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ana Lopez-de-Andres; Rodrigo Jimenez-García; Valentin Hernandez-Barrera; Napoleon Perez-Farinos; Jose M de Miguel-Yanes; Manuel Mendez-Bailon; Isabel Jimenez-Trujillo; Angel Gil de Miguel; Carmen Gallardo Pino; Pilar Carrasco-Garrido Journal: Cardiovasc Diabetol Date: 2014-01-03 Impact factor: 9.951