Cargando…

Acute Myocardial Infarction Is a Risk Factor for New Onset Diabetes in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that acute myocardial infarction (AMI) might accelerate development of new onset diabetes in patients with coronary artery disease independent of known risk factors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study within COACT (CathOlic medical center percutAneou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Park, Chul Soo, Chung, Woo Baek, Choi, Yun Seok, Kim, Pum Joon, Lee, Jong Min, Baek, Ki-Hyun, Kim, Hee Yeol, Yoo, Ki Dong, Song, Ki-Ho, Chung, Wook Sung, Seung, Ki Bae, Lee, Man Young, Kwon, Hyuk-Sang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4546589/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26295946
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136354
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that acute myocardial infarction (AMI) might accelerate development of new onset diabetes in patients with coronary artery disease independent of known risk factors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study within COACT (CathOlic medical center percutAneous Coronary inTervention) registry. From a total of 9,127 subjects, 2,036 subjects were diabetes naïve and followed up for at least one year with both index and follow-up laboratory data about diabetes. Cox proportional hazard model was used to derive hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for new onset diabetes associated with AMI in univariate and multivariate analysis after adjusting several covariates. RESULTS: The overall hazard for diabetes was higher in AMI compared to non-AMI patients (p by log rank <0.01) with HR of 1.78 and 95% CI of 1.37–2.32 in univariate analysis. This association remained significant after adjusting covariates (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.14–2.07; p<0.01). AMI was an independent predictor for higher quartile of WBC count in multivariate ordinal logistic regression analysis (OR, 6.75; 95% CI, 5.53–8.22, p<0.01). In subgroup analysis, the diabetogenic effect of AMI was more prominent in the subgroup without MetS compared to MetS patients (p for interaction<0.05). Compared to the reference group of non-AMI+nonMetS, the group of AMI+non-MetS (HR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.58–3.76), non-AMI+MetS (HR, 3.42; 95% CI, 2.34–4.98) and AMI+MetS (HR, 4.12; 95% CI, 2.67–6.36) showed higher HR after adjusting covariates. However, the hazard was not different between the non-AMI+MetS and AMI+non-MetS groups. CONCLUSIONS: AMI patients have a greater risk of new-onset diabetes when compared to non AMI patients, especially those with mild metabolic abnormalities.