Management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and acute coronary syndrome: Better be safe than sorry!

International guideline comparison of lifestyle management for acute coronary syndrome and type 2 diabetes mellitus: A rapid review

Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a life-threatening condition, with ACS-associated morbidity and mortality causing substantial human and economic challenges to the individual and health services. Due to shared disease determinants, those with ACS have a high risk of comorbid Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Despite this, the two conditions are managed separately, duplicating workload for staff and increasing the number of appointments and complexity of patient management plans. This rapid review compared current ACS and T2DM guidelines across Australia, Canada, Europe, Ireland, New Zealand, the UK, and the USA. Results highlighted service overlap, repetition, and opportunities for integrated practice for ACS-T2DM lifestyle management across diet and nutrition, physical activity, weight management, clinical and psychological health. Recommendations are made for potential integration of ACS-T2DM service provision to streamline care and reduce siloed care in the context of the health services for ACS-T2DM and similar comorbid conditions.

Contrast-induced nephropathy in non-cardiac vascular procedures, a narrative review: Part 1

Contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) is an important complication of iodinated contrast medium (CM) administration, which is associated with both short- and long-term adverse outcomes (e.g., cardiorenal events, longer hospital stay, and mortality). CIN has been mainly studied in relation to cardiac procedures, but it can also occur following non-cardiac vascular interventions. This is Part 1 of a narrative review summarizing the available literature on CIN after non-cardiac vascular diagnostic or therapeutic procedures for aortic aneurysm and carotid stenosis. We discuss the definition, pathophysiology, incidence, risk factors, biomarkers, and consequences of CIN in these settings, as well as preventive strategies and alternatives to limit iodinated CM use. Physicians and vascular surgeons should be aware of CM-related adverse events and the potential strategies to avoid them. Clearly, more research in this important field is required.

Prognostic value of serum calprotectin level in elderly diabetic patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A Cohort study

Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have an increased serum level of calprotectin. The purpose of present study was to analyze the prognostic significance of serum calprotectin levels in elderly diabetic patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) due to ACS.A total of 273 consecutive elderly diabetic patients underwent PCI for primary ACS were enrolled. Serum calprotectin levels were measured before PCI, and baseline clinical characteristics of all patients were collected. All patients were followed up at regular interval for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) during 1 year after PCI. MACEs include cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The predicting value of serum calprotectin for MACEs was analyzed by using univariate and multivariate analysis and receiver-operating characteristic curve (ROC).At the endpoint of this study, 47 patients of all 273 patients had MACEs. According to optimal cutoff value of calprotectin for predicting MACEs by ROC analysis, all patients were stratified into a high calprotectin group and a low calprotectin group. The incidence rate of MACEs and TVR in high calprotectin group was prominently higher than that in low calprotectin group (21.9% vs 11.5%, P = .02). In multivariable COX regression analysis adjusting for potential confounders, serum calprotectin level remains as an independent risk predictor of MACE (hazard ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-4.62; P = .01).In diabetic patients with a comorbidity of ACS, a high serum level of calprotectin is associated to a higher MACE rate after PCI.

Serum Calprotectin Levels and Outcome Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Diabetes and Acute Coronary Syndrome

Background

A retrospective study of data from a prospective clinical registry was conducted to evaluate the prognostic role of serum calprotectin in patients with diabetes who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Material/Methods

Data were retrieved for 273 patients with diabetes mellitus who underwent PCI for primary ACS in a single center. Serum calprotectin levels were measured before PCI. Baseline clinical data included the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score for ACS. All patients underwent regular follow-up for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) during 12 months after PCI, including target vessel revascularization (TVR), defined as the need for an unplanned repeat PCI or coronary artery procedure. The predictive value of serum calprotectin for MACE was analyzed by using univariate and multivariate analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

Results

At the final follow-up, 47 of the 273 patients studies experienced MACE. Optimal cutoff values for serum calprotectin levels predictive for MACE stratified patients into a high calprotectin group and a low calprotectin group. The incidence of MACE and TVR in the high calprotectin group was significantly greater than in the low calprotectin group (21.9% vs. 11.5%; P=0.02). Multivariate analysis, adjusted for confounders, showed that the serum level of calprotectin was an independent risk factor for MACE (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.08–4.62; P=0.01).

Conclusions

In patients with diabetes and the co-morbidity of ACS, a high serum level of calprotectin was associated with a significantly increased risk for MACE following PCI.

Is type 2 diabetes mellitus a coronary heart disease equivalent or not? Do not just enjoy the debate and forget the patient!

In the last several years there has been a large debate whether patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) should be treated as those with high or very high cardiovascular risk, and whether T2DM should be considered as equivalent to coronary heart disease (CHD). It all started in the 2001 in National Cholesterol Education Program - Adult Treatment Panel III recommendations, and the knowledge has changed on this issue at least several times. But the main problem is that due to these inconsistencies and different approaches to the cardiovascular risk of T2DM patients, we have more and more patients with T2DM not effectively treated, and diabetologists mostly focus on glucose (glucocentric approach), often forgetting about the overall cardiovascular risk of those patients. In this review we discuss the above-mentioned topic, try to give some practical suggestions, and raise the issue of whether we should start a discussion on treating all patients with T2DM as those at very high cardiovascular risk, or to at least to try to unify the definition and find such variables/risk factors which are easy to measure to help physicians to treat those patients optimally. We have obviously discussed these issues in the context of new European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) Guidelines 2019.