STATE-OF-THE-ART PAPER
Coronary Heart Disease in Patients With DiabetesPart I: Recent Advances in Prevention and Noninvasive Management
Colin Berry, MD, PhD2,
Jean-Claude Tardif, MD, FACC1 and
Martial G. Bourassa, MD, FACC*
Department of Medicine, Montreal Heart Institute and Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Manuscript received July 11, 2006;
revised manuscript received September 7, 2006,
accepted September 11, 2006.
* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Martial G. Bourassa, Research Center, Montreal Heart Institute, Montreal, Quebec H1T 1C8, Canada. (Email: martial.bourassa{at}icm-mhi.org).
 |
Abstract
|
|---|
Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a worldwide epidemic. Its prevalence is rapidly increasing in both developing and developed countries. Coronary heart disease (CHD) is highly prevalent and is the major cause of morbidity and mortality in diabetic patients. The purpose of this review is to assess the clinical impact of recent advances in the epidemiology, prevention, and management of CHD in diabetic patients. A systematic review of publications in this area, referenced in MEDLINE in the past 5 years (2000 to 2005), was undertaken. Patients with CHD and prediabetic states should undergo lifestyle modifications aimed at preventing DM. Pharmacological prevention of DM is also promising but requires further study. In patients with CHD and DM, routine use of aspirin and an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACE-I)—unless contraindicated or not tolerated—and strict glycemic, blood pressure, and lipid control are strongly recommended. The targets for secondary prevention in these patients are relatively well defined, but the strategies to achieve them vary and must be individualized. Intense insulin therapy might be needed for glycemic control, and high-dose statin therapy might be needed for lipid control. For blood pressure control, ACE-Is and angiotensin receptor blockers are considered as first-line therapy. Noncompliance, particularly with lifestyle measures, and underprescription of evidence-based therapies remain important unsolved problems.
|
Abbreviations and Acronyms
| | ACE-I = angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor | | ARB = angiotensin receptor blocker | | CHD = coronary heart disease | | CVD = cardiovascular disease | | HbA1c = hemoglobin A1c | | HDL-C = high-density lipoprotein cholesterol | | IFG = impaired fasting glucose | | IGT = impaired glucose tolerance | | LDL-C = low-density lipoprotein cholesterol | | NCEP ATP III = National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III | | OGTT = oral glucose tolerance test |
|
The population health burden of diabetes mellitus (DM) and diabetic coronary heart disease (CHD) remains considerable. Our group previously reviewed the published reports in this area (1); therefore, this work is restricted to publications from the years 2000 to 2005. We undertook a systematic Medline review with the keywords: diabetes, coronary heart disease, epidemiology, clinical trial, morbidity, mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), coronary angioplasty, stent, and coronary bypass surgery. In addition, contemporary guidelines from several national and international Societies were consulted (2–7). The present article constitutes the first installment of a 2-tier review that describes the contemporary epidemiology, prevention, and management of CHD in diabetic patients. Part II will describe the role and changing paradigm of coronary revascularization in the management of CHD in diabetic patients.
|
Recent Epidemiological Data
|
|---|
Changing prevalence and incidence of DM is a major public health and economic problem (8). Worldwide estimates of its prevalence are expected to rise from 2.8% (171 million people) in 2000 to 4.4% (366 million people) in 2030 (9). The prevalence of DM is growing rapidly in both developing and developed countries. The countries with the largest number of cases in 2030 will be China, India, and the U.S. The number of Americans with DM is projected to increase 165%, from 11 million people in 2000 to 20 million people in 2025 (prevalence of 4.0%) (10). On the basis of an estimated linear increase in prevalence from 4.0% in 2000 to 7.2% in 2050, the number of diabetic subjects in the U.S. population is projected to rise to at least 29 million people (10). Overall, the projected 18-million increase in 2050 can be attributed to demographic changes (37%), population growth (27%), and increasing prevalence rates (36%) (10).
Insulin resistance often precedes the onset of DM and already exists in the prediabetic states. Thus, abnormal glycoregulation is a spectrum where impaired fasting glucose (IFG), impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), and obesity (mainly central or abdominal obesity) are the intermediate stages. All 3 increase the risk to develop type 2 DM. Recent epidemiological data estimate the prevalence of IFG and IGT to be between 8% and 12% of the adult population (11). Almost 20% of middle-aged adults and 35% of the older population in the U.S. have some degree of abnormal glycoregulation (12). In the year 2000, there were more than 300 million obese adults worldwide, and industrialized countries showed a prevalence of obesity of approximately 20%. Currently, more than one-half of the adult population in the U.S. is overweight or obese (13). The prevalence of obesity in children is also dramatically increasing worldwide, and this contributes to adulthood obesity (14). The prevalence of the metabolic syndrome is estimated to be 10% to 60% (15). Although it occurs mainly in adults, it is also present in both childhood and adolescence. In the U.S., it reaches 50% in severely obese youngsters (16).
|
Metabolic Derangements Associated With DM
|
|---|
Insulin resistance.
Type 2 DM is a multifactorial disease that combines hereditary and environmental factors. Two major metabolic derangements characterize DM: decreased insulin secretion by the pancreatic beta cells, and peripheral resistance to the action of insulin or insulin resistance. Insulin resistance or reduced insulin action on target tissues might not be responsible for DM in the absence of a deficit of insulin secretion (17). Insulin resistance results from environmental factors such as detrimental lifestyle habits, with progressive reduction of physical activity and energy expenditures and increased input of dietary calories, fats, and saturated fatty acids and from genetic or congenital susceptibility to pancreatic beta cell dysfunction with an inability to compensate for greater insulin requirements. Eighty percent of patients with type 2 DM are either obese or overweight (18). Obesity and the metabolic syndrome are linked to hyperinsulinemia and insulin resistance and independently predict cardiovascular disease (CVD) and coronary atherosclerosis (19–21).
The metabolic syndrome is a common metabolic disorder that is characterized by increases in waist circumference, blood pressure, and triglyceride levels combined with a reduction in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels and evidence of glucose intolerance (22). Reaven initially proposed that insulin resistance was the main culprit (1), but Lemieux et al. (23) recently suggested that visceral obesity and the hypertriglyceridemic waist phenotype were its central components. When the fatty cells or adipocytes are full, they release cytokines and adipokynes that generate a systemic inflammatory state, damage blood vessels, and contribute to hypertension, dyslipidemia, and insulin resistance (24,25). Thus the metabolic syndrome can be seen as a disorder where central obesity leads to chronic systemic inflammation, systemic endothelial dysfunction, and insulin resistance, the main clinical components of the syndrome (12).
Hyperglycemia.
Despite their high incidence in type 2 DM, CHD risk factors only partly account for the excessive risk of CVD (1,25). Thus, there seems to be an association between hyperglycemia and CVD. Epidemiological data suggest that there is no specific threshold for glycemia in relation with CV risk (26). However, the role of hyperglycemia per se in the excess CV risk is still controversial. The UKPDS (United Kingdom Prospective Diabetic Study) showed a significant relationship, although weak, between chronic hyperglycemia and the incidence of MI (27). In the EDIC/DCCT (Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications/Diabetes Control and Complications Trial) study, the incidence of CV complications was significantly reduced in type 1 diabetic patients receiving intensive insulin therapy initially (28). In the DIGAMI (DIabetes mellitus, Glucose insulin infusion in Acute Myocardial Infarction) study, intensive insulin therapy improved CV prognosis in diabetic after MI patients (1). Although the DIGAMI-2 study confirmed that the glucose level was a strong predictor of mortality in these patients, it did not support the fact that early and continued insulin-based therapy improved survival (29). The PROACTIVE (PROspective pioglitAzone Clinical Trial In macroVascular Events) study evaluated pioglitazone versus placebo in the prevention of CV events in patients with type 2 DM and a history of CVD. Two types of results were obtained: a significant 16% reduction in the composite secondary end point of all-cause mortality, nonfatal MI, and stroke, as compared with placebo; and an increased risk of heart failure (30). The role of glitazones in CV prevention, although strongly supported by experimental and clinical data, must be better defined. This is being evaluated in ongoing clinical trials (Table 1).
Dyslipidemia.
Post hoc analyses of diabetic subpopulations in lipid intervention trials before the year 2000 suggested that correction of lipoprotein abnormalities led to a decrease in CHD (1). More recently, additional clinical trials have reported similar results. For example, the HPS (Heart Protection Study) demonstrated that cholesterol-lowering therapy was beneficial for people with DM even if they did not already have a history of CHD or high cholesterol concentrations (31). Allocation to 40 mg of simvastatin daily reduced the rate of first major CV events by about one-quarter in a wide range of diabetic patients. The results from this trial supported the use of statin therapy in diabetic subjects with relatively normal plasma cholesterol concentrations (31). Several other trials have reported results consistent with the HPS (32–34). More recently, the CARDS (Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study) specifically compared atorvastatin 10 mg daily with a placebo in type 2 diabetic patients without symptomatic CHD who had relatively normal lipid concentrations (35). During a mean follow-up of 3.9 years, atorvastatin reduced major CV events by 37%. The ongoing ASPEN (Atorvastatin Study for the Prevention of CHD ENdpoints) also compares atorvastatin and placebo specifically in type 2 diabetic patients.
Diabetic dyslipidemia has a characteristic lipid profile that includes elevated plasma triglycerides, normal or mildly elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), and reduced plasma HDL-C concentrations (1). Although hypertriglyceridemia increases the risk of CHD in DM, the effect of statin therapy for the treatment of hypertriglyceridemia before the DALI (Diabetes Atorvastatin Lipid Intervention) study was uncertain (1). In the DALI study, high-dose atorvastatin therapy reduced total cholesterol, LDL-C, and apoB to a greater extent than low-dose atorvastatin. Plasma triglycerides decreased and HDL-C increased to a similar extent in both groups (36). In the DAIS (Diabetes Atherosclerosis Intervention Study), treatment with fenofibrate reduced angiographic progression of CHD in patients with type 2 DM, good glycemic control, and mild lipoprotein abnormalities (37). However, in the FIELD (Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes) trial, although fenofibrate reduced plasma triglycerides and increased HDL-C concentrations, it did not significantly decrease the incidence of CV events (38). Thus, regardless of the lipid profile, current evidence does not warrant replacing statins as the first choice for prevention of CHD in patients with DM. The potential role of fenofibrate as part of combination therapy is the focus of the ongoing ACCORD (Action to Control CardiOvascular Risk in Diabetes) trial.
|
Particularities of CHD in DM
|
|---|
In a population-based autopsy study, coronary arteries were examined at 5-mm intervals with a semiquantitive grading system (39). High-grade atherosclerosis was defined as grade 3 (50% to 75%) left main stem disease or grade 4 (>75%) disease for other arteries. Coronary atherosclerosis was found in 49% of diabetic and 33% of nondiabetic decedents. Diabetic decedents more often had MI by autopsy, ventricular dilation, high-grade atherosclerosis, and multivessel disease. The global atherosclerotic burden and prevalence of multivessel disease were similar in diabetic patients without a history of CHD and in non-diabetic patients with a history of CHD. These findings revealed a high prevalence of subclinical atherosclerosis in diabetic subjects without a clinical history of CHD. Ledru et al. (40) recently compared coronary disease in consecutive diabetic and non-diabetic angiography referrals. Coronary disease, objectively evaluated with 3 severity score systems, was more severe in diabetic than in non-diabetic patients and included higher coronary occlusion rates. However, age, gender, LDL-C concentration, and hypertension were more powerful predictors of disease severity than DM. Recent case-control studies have found that, compared with non-diabetic patients, diabetic subjects typically have more severe coronary disease, more extensive coronary calcifications, a higher prevalence of left main stem disease, and reduced coronary collateral artery recruitment (41–43).
Accelerated atherosclerosis and thrombosis in patients with DM are mainly due to systemic inflammation, oxidative stress, and systemic endothelial dysfunction (25,44,45) combined with coagulation and platelet function abnormalities (25,46,47) and impaired fibrinolysis (47).
|
Epidemiology of CHD in DM
|
|---|
The prevalence of CHD rises from 2% to 4% in the general population to as high as 55% among adult diabetic patients (1). Diabetes mellitus is an independent risk factor for CVD in both men and women. Excess risk for CVD can be found in patients with type 1 and type 2 DM, in patients in the prediabetic stages, and in patients with obesity and with the metabolic syndrome (26).
Mortality in diabetic patients.
The overall mortality from heart disease is twice as great in men and is 4 to 5 times higher in women with than without DM (1). Cardiovascular disease represents over one-half of all deaths in both type 1 and type 2 DM (48). In addition, non-CV mortality is greater in diabetic compared with non-diabetic subjects, and this excess risk remains constant during long-term follow-up (49,50). Diabetes mellitus has been considered as a CHD risk factor equivalent. In a prospective cohort study, the age-adjusted relative risk of death from any cause was 2.3 among men with DM but without CHD, 2.2 among men with CHD and without DM, and 4.7 among men with both DM and CHD (51). Patients with DM are more likely to die after an MI than patients without DM (26,52).
Morbidity in diabetic patients.
Diabetes is associated with an increased risk of morbidity in patients with CHD (51). Diabetes mellitus and obesity are predictors of MI (52). About one-quarter of patients who present with an acute MI have DM (12). Diabetes mellitus is a predictor of ischemic stroke and heart failure, and diabetes increases the overall CV risk in patients with heart failure (53,54). Diabetic patients undergo invasive management less often, and when referred for coronary angiography, they wait longer (55,56). In addition, quality of life is reduced in DM patients compared with nondiabetic patients (57).
Mechanisms for the excess CV risk attributable to DM.
The mechanisms responsible for the increased CV mortality and morbidity attributable to DM are multifactorial. In addition to a high prevalence of conventional risk factors, important contributing mechanisms include insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia, hyperglycemia, subclinical atherosclerosis, congestive heart failure, acute coronary syndromes, and end-stage renal failure (12). The first 3 items have been previously discussed. Increased mortality in diabetic patients with left ventricular dysfunction and heart failure can be attributed to CHD, hypertension, left ventricular hypertrophy, obesity, autonomic dysfunction, and diabetic cardiomyopathy (12,58). Diabetes is a major risk factor for adverse outcomes in patients who suffer from unstable angina or MI (12,26). Autonomic dysfunction lowers the threshold for life-threatening arrhythmias and increases the risk of hemodynamic instability. Coagulation and platelet abnormalities increase the risk of thrombosis at the site of plaque disruption and possibly increase the risk of reinfarction after thrombolytic therapy. Finally, diabetes has emerged as the leading cause of end-stage renal disease in the U.S., and this condition carries a 5-year survival of only 20% in patients with DM and CHD (12,59). Albuminuria is an important prognostic marker and a potential target for therapy in hypertensive diabetic patients with impaired renal function (60). Recent clinical trials have shown that both angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-Is) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are nephroprotective in patients suffering from type 2 DM, and these effects are independent from those attributable to blood pressure (BP) lowering (61–64).
|
Primary Prevention of DM in At-Risk Individuals
|
|---|
Screening.
The American Diabetes Association recommends screening for type 2 DM in at-risk individuals (4). In particular, individuals ages 45 years or older who have a BMI  25 kg/m2 should be assessed at 3 yearly intervals. The screening test should include a fasting blood glucose (FBG) or a 2-h oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) (4). A diagnosis of DM is made if 2 consecutive FG levels are 7.0 mmol/l (126 mg/dl) or a 2-h post-load value is 11.1 mmol/l (200 mg/dl) within a 3-month period. In addition, community screening programs should be targeted to at-risk individuals (65).
Lifestyle modification.
The hypothesis that type 2 DM is preventable is supported by recent clinical trials. At least 2 types of interventions have demonstrated their efficacy in terms of primary prevention of type 2 DM: lifestyle modification by dietary measures and physical exercise aiming at weight loss, and different pharmacological interventions.
Lifestyle modification, in patients with prediabetic states, has been shown in 3 placebo-controlled trials to markedly reduce the risk of new-onset DM (66–68) (Table 2). Nutritional therapy coordinated by dieticians had an important role in the lifestyle intervention, and individualized therapy is currently recommended in type 2 DM (4). Along with 1 earlier controlled trial of lifestyle changes for the prevention of DM in at-risk patients in China (68), the DPP (Diabetes Prevention Program) and Finnish trials support a strong recommendation for lifestyle intervention in patients with IGT (Table 2).
Pharmacological interventions.
Recent trials in patients with hypertension and heart failure have indirectly shown the preventive effect of ACE-Is on DM (69–72). Similar results were reported with ARBs (73–76). These data must be interpreted with caution, however, because prevention of DM was not the primary end point in any of these trials. The effect of ACE-Is and ARBs on the progression to DM is now being tested as a primary outcome in ongoing randomized trials (77,78) (Table 2).
Other drugs that have also been shown to reduce the new onset of DM in at-risk subjects (obese or prediabetic individuals) include acarbose (79), bezafibrate (80), and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) gamma inhibitors (81). In the DPP, the crude incidence of DM was 11 cases/100 person-years, 7.8 cases/100 person-years, and 4.8 cases/100 person-years for the placebo, metformin, and lifestyle-intervention groups, respectively (66). Compared with placebo, these interventions were also associated with increased time to DM onset, reduced glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and reduced FG concentrations. Overall, metformin was less effective than lifestyle intervention (Fig. 1, Table 2).
View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 1 Cumulative Incidence of Diabetes According to Study Group
The incidence of diabetes differed significantly among the 3 groups (p < 0.001). Compared with placebo, the lifestyle intervention reduced the incidence of diabetes during follow-up by 58% (95% confidence interval [CI] 48% to 66%) and metformin reduced it by 31% (95% CI 17% to 43%). The incidence of diabetes was 39% lower (95% CI 24% to 51%) in the former than in the latter group. Reproduced from The Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group (66) with permission.
|
|
|
Secondary Prevention and Management of CHD in Diabetic Patients
|
|---|
Screening for CHD in diabetic patients.
Diabetes is commonly considered as a CHD risk equivalent (2,6). High-risk diabetic patients include those with typical or atypical symptoms, those 55 years or older, those with peripheral or carotid vascular disease, and those with 2 or more of the following risk factors: hyperlipidemia, hypertension, smoking, family history of premature CHD, microalbuminuria, and progressive retinopathy (82). Screening for CHD might be indicated in younger individuals, with a relatively short duration of DM and few risk or diabetic complications, because most guidelines recommend more aggressive management of risk factors in the presence of CHD. Detection of CHD involves the usual diagnostic methods, which include exercise stress testing and, as indicated, myocardial perfusion scintigraphy or stress echocardiography (82).
Pharmacological interventions to prevent CHD in diabetes.
The implementation of lifestyle modification, including dietary measures and aerobic exercise aiming at long-term weight loss, are even more critical in patients with diabetic CHD than in those with DM alone, because of the higher risk of CV events in these patients.
Antiplatelet therapy
Primary prevention therapy with aspirin is recommended in diabetic patients >40 years of age, with additional risk factors, and/or with diabetes >10 years’ duration (4). Contemporary guidelines recommend prophylactic therapy with aspirin for diabetic patients with CHD (4,46). In patients who do not tolerate or have a contra-indication to aspirin, clopidogrel can be used as an alternative antiplatelet agent.
A post hoc analysis of the diabetic patients randomized in the CAPRIE (Clopidogrel versus Aspirin in Patients at Risk of Ischemic Events) study found that clopidogrel therapy reduced the relative risk of death, MI, stroke, or repeat hospital stay compared with aspirin therapy (83). However, specific randomized trials will be needed to determine whether clopidogrel alone or clopidogrel plus aspirin is superior to aspirin alone in the prevention of cardiovascular events in diabetic patients with established CVD.
Optimization of glycemic control
The goal of anti-diabetic drug therapy is to ensure optimal glycemic control (HbA1c <7% for all patients and, for the individual patient, an HbA1c as close to normal [<6%] as possible) with minimization of diabetes-related complications (4,6). There is no specific threshold for glycemia in relation to CV risk. Thus, optimal glycemic control must be a clear objective in diabetic patients, not only for prevention of microvascular but also of macrovascular events (1).
Multiple pharmacological interventions are often required, and there is still uncertainty on the best strategy to achieve glycemic control in diabetic patients with CHD. Intensive insulin therapy was effective in the prevention of CV events in the DIGAMI and EDIC/DCCT trials (Fig. 2) but not in the DIGAMI-2 trial. The PROACTIVE study has shown that pioglitazone also seems to be beneficial but should be given carefully to patients with CHD to avoid ventricular dysfunction or heart failure. Finally, it is not clear yet whether insulin-providing drugs such as insulin and sulfonylureas are more effective in the secondary prevention of CVD than insulin-sensitizers such as metformin and the glitazones. These questions are being examined in ongoing randomized trials (47,84–86) (Table 1).
View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
[Download PPT slide]
|
Figure 2 Cumulative Incidence of Cardiovascular Outcomes
Cumulative incidence of the first of any of the predefined cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcomes (A) and of the first occurrence of nonfatal MI, stroke, or death from CVD (B). Compared with conventional treatment, intensive diabetic treatment reduced the risk of any predefined CVD outcome by 42% (95% confidence interval [CI] 9% to 63%; p = 0.02) (A) and reduced the risk of the first occurrence of nonfatal MI, stroke, or death from CVD by 57% (95% CI 12% to 79%; p = 0.02) (B). Reproduced from Nathan et al. (28) with permission.
|
|
Antihypertensive therapy
The current antihypertension treatment targets are <130/<80 mm Hg in diabetic patients (120/80 mm Hg after MI) (4,5). In the UKPDS BP-lowering substudy, intensive therapy was associated with reduced risks of stroke and MI (87). Greater risk reduction was achieved with lower BP levels, and there was no threshold for risk reduction (88). The evidence for drug efficacy in reducing CV events in high-risk patients with DM is largely derived from subgroup analyses of recent trials (71,89). In the ASCOT (Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial), the benefits of the amlodipine-based regimen (with or without perindopril) versus the atenolol-based regimen on rates of nonfatal MI and fatal CHD were similar for hypertensive patients with or without DM (89). In the diabetic patients randomized in the MICRO-HOPE (Microalbuminuria, Cardiovascular, and Renal Outcomes-Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation) substudy, ramipril reduced the primary composite end point of MI, stroke, or CV death (61). Diabetic patients derived similar risk reductions with perindopril in the EUROPA (EURopean trial On reduction of cardiac events with Perindopril in stable coronary Artery disease) (90). In the LIFE (Losartan Intervention For Endpoints) study reduction in hypertension study, the primary composite end point of CV death, stroke, or MI occurred less often in patients assigned to losartan than in those assigned to atenolol. Thus, compared with a beta-blocker–based regimen, losartan therapy conferred consistent CV risk reduction in hypertensive diabetic patients (91). Two ongoing ARB randomized trials assessing CV prevention trials will include diabetic patients (92).
Current clinical guidelines recommend primary prevention measures with ACE-I therapy in diabetic patients with 1 other CHD risk factor and secondary prevention with these drugs in diabetic patients with CHD (4,6). Recognizing that diabetic patients will usually need 3 or 4 antihypertensive drugs to lower BP to the recommended level, ACE-Is and ARBs (along with long-acting calcium channel blockers) are recommended as first-line therapy (4,6). Cardioselective beta-blockers and thiazide diuretic agents should be viewed as second-line anti-hypertensive therapy in DM.
Lipid-lowering therapy
Lipid lowering therapy is recommended for diabetic patients 40 years of age or subjects <40 years of age with additional risk factors (4). The current lipid target ranges are LDL-C <100 mg/dl or a reduction in LDL-C by 30% to 40%, triglycerides <150 mg/dl, and HDL-C >40 mg/dl (4). In women, an HDL-C goal of 10 mg/dl higher (50 mg/dl) might be considered. The National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP ATP III) guidelines recommend lower LDL-C targets for patients suffering from both DM and CHD than for those suffering from DM alone (3). On the basis of the HPS and other trials (26,93,94), it is reasonable to target a LDL-C of 70 mg/dl for high-risk subjects such as diabetic patients (3).
There is a log-linear relationship between LDL-C concentration and relative risk of CHD. Recent trials have suggested that cholesterol-lowering therapy is beneficial for patients with DM even in the absence of a history of CHD or high cholesterol, suggesting that statin therapy should be initiated in DM regardless of LDL-C level (31–34,95). Should high-risk patients have concomitant hypertriglyceridemia or low HDL-C, it might be appropriate to add a fibrate or nicotinic acid (3,95). Combination therapy with lipid-modifying agents has not, however, been fully evaluated in CVD outcomes studies, and this approach has not yet achieved an expert consensus (4).
Diabetic patients with unstable CAD
The established beneficial effects of reperfusion therapy, both with primary percutaneous coronary intervention and fibrinolytic therapy, and secondary post-reperfusion prevention with antiplatelet agents, beta-blockers, ACE-Is, and ARBs are discussed elsewhere.
|
Noncompliance and Underprescription of Medication
|
|---|
In the DPP trial, only 50% of the lifestyle intervention group achieved the goal of 7% weight reduction, and 74% maintained at least 150 min/week of moderately intense physical activity (66).
In the NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Survey) 1999 to 2000, only 37% of participants achieved the target goal of HbA1c level <7.0% and another 37% were above the recommended "take action" HbA1c level of >8.0%. These percentages did not change significantly from the NHANES III (1988 to 1994) (96–98). Among the NHANES III participants ages >65 years, a target HbA1c concentration of <7% was achieved by 71%, 44%, and 2% of persons using no drug therapy, oral hypoglycemic agents, and insulin, respectively. In the NHANES 1999 to 2000, only 36% of patients achieved the BP target of <130/<80 mm Hg, and 40% had hypertensive levels (140 or 90 mm Hg) despite therapy. Over one-half of the participants in the NHANES 1999 to 2000 had cholesterol levels 200 mg/dl (52% vs. 66% in the NHANES III). In the LTAP (Lipid Treatment Assessment Project), only 41% of diabetic patients and 38% of nondiabetic patients attained the NCEP ATP III LDL-C guidelines (99).
Quite surprisingly, overall, only 7% of adults with DM in the NHANES 1999 to 2000 attained recommended goals of HbA1c <7%, BP <130/80 mm Hg, and cholesterol <200 mg/dl (98). Multiple sociodemographic factors might explain the low rate of treatment target achievement (100). In addition to noncompliance, underprescription of evidence-based preventive therapies is also a major issue (54,100). Thus, our efforts to jugulate the current epidemic of DM and its CV consequences must include, as a very high priority, improved compliance to lifestyle measures and drug therapy through patient and community counseling as well as sensibilization of the medical profession to the importance of primary and secondary CV prevention through appropriate long-term prescription of evidence-based therapies.
|
Conclusions
|
|---|
The global incidence and prevalence of DM is rapidly increasing in both developed and developing countries. CHD in diabetic individuals represents a major worldwide public health problem. Obesity, IFG, IGT, and DM form a continuous spectrum of risk of CVD. Glucose intolerance and the associated traditional risk factors for CVD, such as dyslipidemia and hypertension, might be present for many years before the diagnosis of DM. In patients with CHD and the prediabetic states, primary prevention of DM is now feasible and effective. In particular, lifestyle measures are recommended, and emerging evidence supports the role for therapeutic prevention of type 2 DM. Because of the epidemic proportions of DM worldwide, prevention of DM and prediabetic states might well be the most effective strategy to prevent serious CV events. Morbidity and mortality from CVD in diabetic patients with CHD are rapidly increasing. Screening for at-risk subjects can be a cost-effective intervention. Reduction of the increased risk of CVD in patients with CHD and DM requires a multifactorial approach. The data currently available suggest that this can be achieved by intensive glycemic control and aggressive treatment of other CV risk factors, such as dyslipidemia, hypertension, and smoking. Noncompliance, particularly with lifestyle measures, and underprescription of evidence-based therapies, however, remain major unsolved problems.
|
Footnotes
|
|---|
1 Dr. Tardif is the Pfizer and Canadian Institutes of Health Research Chair in Atherosclerosis. 
2 Dr. Berry is supported by a British Heart Foundation International Fellowship.
|
References
|
|---|
1. Hammoud T, Tanguay JF, Bourassa MG. Management of coronary artery disease: therapeutic options in patients with diabetes J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:355-365.[Abstract/Free Full Text]2. Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults Executive summary of the Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III) JAMA 2001;285:2486-2497.[Free Full Text] 3. Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Merz CNB, et al. Implications of recent clinical trials for the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines Circulation 2004;110:227-239.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 4. American Diabetes Association Standards of medical care in diabetes Diabetes Care 2006;29:S4-S42.[Free Full Text] 5. Canadian Diabetes Association Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and management of diabetes in Canada Can J Diabetes 2003;27:S58-S65. 6. Antman EM, Anbe DT, Armstrong PW, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:e1-e211.[CrossRef][Medline] 7. Braunwald E, Antman EM, Beasley JW, et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with unstable angina and non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;38:294-295.[Free Full Text] 8. Narayan KMV, Gregg EW, Fagot-Campagna A, Engelgau MM, Vinicor F. Diabetes: a common, growing, serious, costly, and potentially preventable public health problem Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2000;50:S77-S84.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 9. Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, Sicree R, King H. Global prevalence of diabetes: estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030 Diabetes Care 2004;27:1047-1053.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 10. Boyle JP, Honeycutt AA, Narayan KMV, et al. Projection of diabetes burden through 2050: impact of changing demography and disease prevalence in the U.S Diabetes Care 2001;24:1936-1940.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 11. Unwin N, Shaw J, Zimmet P, Alberti KG. Impaired glucose tolerance and impaired fasting glycaemia: the current status on definition and intervention Diabet Med 2002;19:708-723.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 12. Grundy SM, Howard B, Smith S, Eckel RH, Redberg R, Bonow RO. Prevention Conference VI: Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease: Executive Summary Conference Proceeding for Healthcare Professionals From a Special Writing Group of the American Heart Association Circulation 2002;105:2231-2239.[Free Full Text] 13. Mokdad AH, Ford ES, Bowman BA, et al. Prevalence of obesity, diabetes, and obesity-related health risk factors, 2001 JAMA 2003;289:76-79.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 14. McTigue KM, Garrett JM, Popkin BM. The natural history of the development of obesity in a cohort of young US adults between 1981 and 1998 Ann Intern Med 2002;136:857-864.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 15. Cameron AJ, Shaw JE, Zimmet PZ. The metabolic syndrome: prevalence in worldwide populations Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am 2004;33:351-356.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 16. Weiss R, Dziura J, Burgert TSW, et al. Obesity and the metabolic syndrome in children and adolescents N Engl J Med 2004;350:2362-2374.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 17. Gerich JE. Insulin resistance is not necessarily an essential component of type 2 diabetes J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2000;85:2113-2115.[Free Full Text] 18. Kahn BB, Flier JS. Obesity and insulin resistance J Clin Invest 2000;106:473-481.[Web of Science][Medline] 19. Hanley AJG, Williams K, Stern MP, Haffner SM. Homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance in relation to the incidence of cardiovascular disease: the San Antonio Heart Study Diabetes Care 2002;25:1177-1184.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 20. Bonora E, Formentini G, Calcaterra F, et al. HOMA-estimated insulin resistance is an independent predictor of cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetic subjects: prospective data from the Verona Diabetes Complicated Study Diabetes Care 2002;25:1135-1141.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 21. Sowers JR. Obesity as a cardiovascular risk factor Am J Med 2003;115:37-41.[CrossRef] 22. Giles TD, Sander GE. Pathophysiologic, diagnostic, and therapeutic aspects of the metabolic syndrome J Clin Hypertens 2005;7:669-678.[CrossRef] 23. Lemieux I, Pascot A, Couillard C, et al. Hypertriglyceridemic waist: a marker of the atherogenic metabolic triad (hyperinsulinemia, hyperapolipoprotein B, small dense LDL) in men? Circulation 2000;102:179-184.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 24. Wisse BE. The inflammatory syndrome: the role of adipose tissue cytokines in metabolic disorders linked to obesity J Am Soc Nephrol 2004;15:2792-2800.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 25. Hayden JM, Reaven PD. Cardiovascular disease in diabetes mellitus type 2: a potential role for novel cardiovascular risk factors Curr Opin Lipidol 2000;11:519-528.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 26. Lteif AA, Mather KJ, Clark CM. Diabetes and heart disease an evidence-driven guide to risk factors management in diabetes Cardiol Rev 2003;11:262-274.[CrossRef][Medline] 27. Stratton IM, Adler AI, Neil HAW, et al. Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study BMJ 2000;321:405-412.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 28. Nathan DM, Cleary PA, Backlund JYC, et al. Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes N Engl J Med 2005;353:2643-2653.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 29. Malmberg K, Ryden L, Wedel H, et al. Intense metabolic control by means of insulin in patients with diabetes mellitus and acute myocardial infarction (DIGAMI 2): effects on mortality and morbidity Eur Heart J 2005;26:650-661.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 30. Dormandy JA, Charbonnel B, Eckland DJA, et al. Secondary prevention of macrovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes in the PROactive Study (PROspective pioglitAzone Clinical Trial In macroVascular Events): a randomised controlled trial Lancet 2005;366:1279-1289.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 31. Collins R, Armitage J, Parish S, Sleight P, Peto R. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20536 high-risk individuals: a randomised placebo-controlled trial Lancet 2002;360:7-22.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 32. Furberg CD, Wright JT, Davis BR, et al. Major outcomes in moderately hypercholesterolemic, hypertensive patients randomized to pravastatin vs usual care: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT-LLT) JAMA 2002;288:2998-3007.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 33. Sever PS, Dahlof B, Poulter NR, et al. Prevention of coronary and stroke events with atorvastatin in hypertensive patients who have average or lower-than-average cholesterol concentrations, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Lipid Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA): a multicentre randomised controlled trial Lancet 2003;361:1149-1158.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 34. Shepherd J, Blauw GJ, Murphy MB, et al. Pravastatin in elderly individuals at risk of vascular disease (PROSPER): a randomised controlled trial Lancet 2002;360:1623-1630.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 35. Colhoun HM, Betteridge DJ, Durrington PN, et al. Primary prevention of cardiovascular disease with atorvastatin in type 2 diabetes in the Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study (CARDS): multicentre randomised placebo-controlled trial Lancet 2004;364:685-696.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 36. Berkplanken I, Hoogerbrugge N, Jansen H, et al. The effect of aggessive versus standard lipid lowering by atorvastatin on diabetic dyslipidemia. The DALI study: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in patients with type 2 diabetes and diabetic dyslipidemia. Diabetes Care 2001;24:1335-1341.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 37. Steiner G, Hamsten A, Hosking J, et al. Effect of fenofibrate on progression of coronary-artery disease in type 2 diabetes: the Diabetes Atherosclerosis Intervention Study, a randomised study Lancet 2001;357:905-910.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 38. Keech A, Simes RJ, Barter P, et al. Effects of long-term fenofibrate therapy on cardiovascular events in 9795 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (the FIELD study): randomised controlled trial Lancet 2005;366:1849-1861.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 39. Goraya TY, Leibson CL, Palumbo PJ, et al. Coronary atherosclerosis in diabetes mellitus: a population-based autopsy study J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;40:946-953.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 40. Ledru F, Ducimetiere P, Battaglia S, et al. New diagnostic criteria for diabetes and coronary artery disease: Insights from an angiographic study J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37:1543-1550.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 41. Natali A, Vichi S, Landi P, Severi S, L’Abbate A, Ferrannini E. Coronary atherosclerosis in Type II diabetes: angiographic findings and clinical outcome Diabetologia 2000;43:632-641.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 42. Cariou B, Bonnevie L, Mayaudon H, Dupuy O, Ceccaldi B, Bauduceau B. Angiographic characteristics of coronary artery disease in diabetic patients compared with matched non-diabetic subjects Diabetes Nutr Metab 2000;13:134-141.[Web of Science][Medline] 43. Werner GS, Richartz BM, Heinke S, Ferrari M, Figulla HR. Impaired acute collateral recruitment as a possible mechanism for increased cardiac adverse events in patients with diabetes mellitus Eur Heart J 2003;24:1134-1142.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 44. Guerci B, Kearney-Schwartz A, Bohme P, Zannad F, Drouin P. Endothelial dysfunction and type 2 diabetes Part 1: physiology and methods for exploring the endothelial function Diabetes Metab 2001;27:425-434.[Web of Science][Medline] 45. Guerci B, Bohme P, Kearney-Schwartz A, Zannad F, Drouin P. Endothelial dysfunction and type 2 diabetes, Part 2: altered endothelial function and the effects of treatments in type 2 diabetes mellitus Diabetes Metab 2001;27:436-447.[Web of Science][Medline] 46. Colwell JA, Nesto RW. The platelet in diabetes: focus on prevention of ischemic events Diabetes Care 2003;26:2181-2188.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 47. Sobel BE, Frye R, Detre KM. Burgeoning dilemmas in the management of diabetes and cardiovascular disease: rationale for the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial Circulation 2003;107:636-642.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 48. Morrish NJ, Wang SL, Stevens LK, Fuller JH, Keen H. Mortality and causes of death in the WHO multinational study of vascular disease in diabetes Diabetologia 2001;44:S14-S21.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 49. Bertoni AG, Saydah S, Brancati F. Diabetes, cardiovascular disease, adiposity and the risk of infectious mortality in the United States Diabetes 2000;49:A190.[CrossRef] 50. Vaccaro O, Eberly LE, Neaton JD, Yang LF, Riccardi G, Stamler J. Impact of diabetes and previous myocardial infarction on long-term survival: 25-year mortality follow-up of primary screenees of the multiple risk factor intervention trial Arch Intern Med 2004;164:1438-1443.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 51. Lotufo PA, Gaziano JM, Chae CU, et al. Diabetes and all-cause and coronary heart disease mortality among U.S. male physicians Arch Intern Med 2001;161:242-247.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 52. Van de Werf F, Ardissino D, Betriu A, et al. Management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation Eur Heart J 2003;24:28-66.[Free Full Text] 53. Steg PG, Dabbous OH, Feldman LJ, et al. Determinants and prognostic impact of heart failure complicating acute coronary syndromes observations from the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) Circulation 2004;109:494-499.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 54. Vikman S, Niemela K, Ilva T, et al. Underuse of evidence-based treatment modalities in diabetic patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome. A prospective nation-wide study on acute coronary syndromes (FINACS). Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2003;61:39-48.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 55. Montalescot G, Dabbous OH, Lim MJ, Flather, MD, Mehta RH. Relation of timing of cardiac catheterization to outcomes in patients with non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or unstable angina pectoris enrolled in the multinational Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events Am J Cardiol 2005;95:1397-1403.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 56. Brown DW, Balluz LS, Giles WH, et al. Diabetes mellitus and health-related quality of life among older adults. Findings from the behavioral risk factor surveillance system (BRFSS). Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2004;65:105-115.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 57. Maddigan SL, Feeny DH, Johnson JA. Health-related quality of life deficits associated with diabetes and comorbidities in a Canadian National Population Health Survey Qual Life Res 2005;14:1311-1320.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 58. Bell DSH. Diabetic cardiomyopathy Diabetes Care 2003;26:2949-2951.[Free Full Text] 59. Chen J, Muntner P, Hamm LL, et al. The metabolic syndrome and chronic kidney disease in US adults Ann Intern Med 2004;140:167-174.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 60. Anavekar NS, Gans DJ, Berl T, et al. Predictors of cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetic nephropathy and hypertension: a case for albuminuria Kidney Internat 2004;66:S50-S55. 61. Gerstein HC, Yusuf S, Mann JFE, et al. Effects of ramipril on cardiovascular and microvascular outcomes in people with diabetes mellitus: results of the HOPE study and MICRO-HOPE substudy Lancet 2000;355:253-259.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 62. Brenner BM, Cooper ME, de Zeeuw D, et al. Effects of losartan on renal and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy N Engl J Med 2001;345:861-869.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 63. Rossing K, Jensen BR, Christensen PK, Parving HH. Dual blockade of the renin-angiotensin system in diabetic nephropathy: a randomized double-blind crossover study Diabetes Care 2002;25:95-100.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 64. Andersen NH, Eiskjer H, Poulsen PL, et al. Long-term dual blockade with candesartan and lisinopril in hypertensive patients with diabetes: the CALM II study Diabetes Care 2005;28:273-277.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 65. Edelstein SL, Brancati FL, Barrett-Connor E, et al. Strategies to identify adults at high risk for type 2 diabetes Diabetes Care 2005;28:138-144.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 66. The Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin N Engl J Med 2002;346:393-403.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 67. Tuomilehto J, Lindstrom J, Eriksson JG, et al. Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance N Engl J Med 2001;344:1343-1350.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 68. Guangwei L, Yinghua H, Wenying Y, et al. Effects of insulin resistance and insulin secretion on the efficacy of interventions to retard development of type 2 diabetes mellitus: the DA Qing IGT and diabetes trial Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2002;58:193-200.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 69. Niklason A, Hedner T, Niskanen L, Lanke J. Development of diabetes is retarded by ACE inhibition in hypertensive patients: a subanalysis of the Captopril Prevention Project (CAPPP) J Hypertens 2004;22:645-652.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 70. Vermes E, Ducharme A, Bourassa MG, Lessard M, White M, Tardif JC. Enalapril reduces the incidence of diabetes in patients with chronic heart failure: insight from the Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction (SOLVD) Circulation 2003;107:1291-1296.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 71. Yusuf S, Phil D, Sleight P, et al. Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients N Engl J Med 2000;342:145-153.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 72. Furberg CD, Wright JT, Davis BR, et al. Major cardiovascular events in hypertensive patients randomized to doxazosin vs chlorthalidone: the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT) JAMA 2000;283:1967-1975.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 73. Dahlof B, Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE, et al. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol Lancet 2002;359:995-1003.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 74. Julius S, Kjeldsen SE, Weber M, et al. Outcomes in hypertensive patients at high cardiovascular risk treated with regimens based on valsartan or amlodipine: the VALUE randomised trial Lancet 2004;363:2022-2031.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 75. Pfeffer MA, Swedberg K, Granger CB, et al. Effects of candesartan on mortality and morbidity in patients with chronic heart failure: the CHARM-Overall programme Lancet 2003;362:759-766.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 76. Lithell H, Hansson L, Skoog I, et al. The Study on Cognition and Prognosis in the Elderly (SCOPE): principal results of a randomized double-blind intervention trial J Hypertens 2003;21:875-886.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 77. The DREAM Trial Investigators Rationale, design and recruitment characteristics of a large, simple international trial of diabetes prevention: the DREAM trial Diabetologia 2004;47:1519-1527.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 78. Califf RM. Insulin resistance: a global epidemic in need of effective therapies Eur Heart J 2003;5(Suppl):C13-C18.[CrossRef] 79. Chiasson JL, Josse RG, Gomis R, Hanefeld M, Karasik A, Laakso M. Acarbose for prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus: the STOP-NIDDM randomised trial Lancet 2002;359:2072-2077.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 80. Tenenbaum A, Motro M, Fisman EZ, et al. Effect of bezafibrate on incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus in obese patients Eur Heart J 2005;26:2032-2038.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 81. The Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group Prevention of type 2 diabetes with troglitazone in the diabetes prevention program Diabetes 2005;54:1150-1156.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 82. Poirier P, Després JP, Bertrand OF. Identifying which patients with diabetes should be tested for the presence of coronary artery disease: the importance of baseline electrocardiogram and exercise testing Can J Cardiol 2006;22:9A-15A.[Web of Science][Medline] 83. Bhatt DL, Marso SP, Hirsch AT, Ringleb PA, Hacke W, Topol EJ. Amplified benefit of Clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients with diabetes mellitus Am J Cardiol 2002;90:625-628.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 84. Abraira C, Duckworth W, McCarren M, et al. Design of the cooperative study on glycemic control and complications in diabetes mellitus type 2 Veterans Affairs Diabetes Trial J Diabetes Complications 2003;17:314-322.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 85. Insulin Resistance Intervention After Stroke (IRIS) trial. Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00091949. Accessed January 24, 2006. 86. Pioglitazone Protects DM Against Re-Infarction (PPAR study). Available at: http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00212004. Accessed February 7, 2006. 87. Adler AI, Stratton IM, Neil HAW, et al. Association of systolic blood pressure with macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 36): prospective observational study BMJ 2000;321:412-419.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 88. Schrier RW, Estacio RO, Esler A, Mehler P. Effects of aggressive blood pressure control in normotensive type 2 diabetic patients on albuminuria, retinopathy and strokes Kidney Int 2002;61:1086-1097.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 89. Dahlof B, Sever PS, Poulter NR, et al. Prevention of cardiovascular events with an antihypertensive regimen of amlodipine adding perindopril as required versus atenolol adding bendroflumethiazide as required, in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Blood Pressure Lowering Arm (ASCOT-BPLA): a multicentre randomised controlled trial Lancet 2005;366:895-906.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 90. Fox KM, Bertrand M, Ferrari R, et al. Efficacy of perindopril in reduction of cardiovascular events among patients with stable coronary artery disease: randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial (the EUROPA study) Lancet 2003;362:782-788.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 91. Lindholm LH, Ibsen H, Dahlof B, et al. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with diabetes in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol Lancet 2002;359:1004-1010.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 92. Yusuf S. From the HOPE to the ONTARGET and the TRANSCEND studies: challenges in improving prognosis Am J Cardiol 2002;89:18A-25A.[Web of Science][Medline] 93. Collins R, Armitage J, Parish S, Sleight P, Peto R. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol-lowering with simvastatin in 5963 people with diabetes: a randomised placebo-controlled trial Lancet 2003;361:2005-2016.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] 94. Cannon CP, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, et al. Intensive versus moderate lipid lowering with statins after acute coronary syndromes N Engl J Med 2004;350:1495-1504.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 95. Pedersen TR, Faergeman O, Kastelein JJP, et al. High-dose atorvastatin vs usual-dose simvastatin for secondary prevention after myocardial infarction: the IDEAL study: a randomized controlled trial JAMA 2005;294:2437-2445.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 96. Koro CE, Boialin SJ, Bourgeois N, Fedder DO. Glycemic control from 1988 to 2000 among U.S. adults diagnosed with type 2 diabetes: a preliminary report Diabetes Care 2004;27:17-20.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 97. Saydah SH, Fradkin J, Cowie CC. Poor control of risk factors for vascular disease among adults with previously diagnosed diabetes JAMA 2004;291:335-342.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 98. Shorr RI, Franse LV, Resnick HE, Di Bari M, Johnson KC, Pahor M. Glycemic control of older adults with type 2 diabetes: findings from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988–1994 J Am Geriatr Soc 2000;48:264-267.[Web of Science][Medline] 99. Pearson TA, Laurora I, Chu H, Kafonek S. The Lipid Treatment Assessment Project (L-TAP): a multicenter survey to evaluate the percentages of dyslipidemic, patients receiving lipid-lowering therapy and achieving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol goals Arch Intern Med 2000;160:459-467.[Abstract/Free Full Text] 100. Everly MJ, Heaton PC, Cluxton RJ. Beta-blocker underuse in secondary prevention of myocardial infarction Ann Pharmacother 2004;38:286-293.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
H. A. Madi, K. Riches, P. Warburton, D. J. O'Regan, N. A. Turner, and K. E. Porter
Inherent differences in morphology, proliferation, and migration in saphenous vein smooth muscle cells cultured from nondiabetic and Type 2 diabetic patients
Am J Physiol Cell Physiol,
November 1, 2009;
297(5):
C1307 - C1317.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Marcheix, F. Vanden Eynden, P. Demers, D. Bouchard, and R. Cartier
Influence of Diabetes Mellitus on Long-Term Survival in Systematic Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
Ann. Thorac. Surg.,
October 1, 2008;
86(4):
1181 - 1188.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. Acampa, M. Petretta, L. Evangelista, G. Nappi, L. Luongo, M. P. Petretta, and A. Cuocolo
Stress cardiac single-photon emission computed tomographic imaging late after coronary artery bypass surgery for risk stratification and estimation of time to cardiac events
J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg.,
July 1, 2008;
136(1):
46 - 51.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Y. Gasparyan, T. Watson, and G. Y.H. Lip
The Role of Aspirin in Cardiovascular Prevention: Implications of Aspirin Resistance
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
May 13, 2008;
51(19):
1829 - 1843.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Kanda, S. Wakino, K. Hayashi, and J. Plutzky
Cardiovascular Disease, Chronic Kidney Disease, and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Proceeding with Caution at a Dangerous Intersection
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol.,
January 1, 2008;
19(1):
4 - 7.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management of Stable Coronary Disease
N. Engl. J. Med.,
October 25, 2007;
357(17):
1762 - 1766.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Cortigiani, F. Rigo, S. Gherardi, R. Sicari, M. Galderisi, F. Bovenzi, and E. Picano
Additional Prognostic Value of Coronary Flow Reserve in Diabetic and Nondiabetic Patients With Negative Dipyridamole Stress Echocardiography by Wall Motion Criteria
J. Am. Coll. Cardiol.,
October 2, 2007;
50(14):
1354 - 1361.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. Terre
Behavioral Medicine Review: Strategic Management of Diabetes Risk
American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine,
October 1, 2007;
1(5):
351 - 355.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
Top
Abstract
Recent Epidemiological Data