Home | About us | Editorial board | Search | Ahead of print | Current issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Subscribe | Contacts | Advertise | Login 
 
Search Article 
  
Advanced search 
  Users Online: 1014 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size  

 
Table of Contents
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 20  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 354-358

Study of differences in presentation, risk factors and management in diabetic and nondiabetic patients with acute coronary syndrome


1 Department of Pharmacology, LBS College of Pharmacy; Department of Clinical Research, Fortis Escorts Hospital, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
2 Department of Pharmacology, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
3 Department of Endocrinology, Fortis Escorts Hospital, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
4 Department of Endocrinology, Galaxy Specialty Centre, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
5 Department of Medicine, Mahatma Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
6 Department of Clinical Research, Fortis Escorts Hospital, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India

Date of Web Publication11-Apr-2016

Correspondence Address:
Krishna Kumar Sharma
Department of Clinical Research, Fortis Escorts Hospital, Room No. 4986, Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur - 302 018, Rajasthan
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2230-8210.179990

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 

Objectives: To compare clinical characteristics, treatment, and utilization of evidence-based medicines at discharge from hospital in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with or without diabetes at a tertiary care cardiac center in India. Methods: We performed an observational study in consecutive patients discharged following management of ACS. We obtained demographic details, comorbid conditions, and cardiovascular risk factors, physical and biochemical parameters, and management. Descriptive statistics are reported. Results: We enrolled 100 patients (diabetics = 28) with mean age of 59.0 ± 10.8 years (diabetics 59.3 ± 11.6, nondiabetics 58.9 ± 8.5). Forty-nine patients had ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (diabetics = 14, 28.7%) while 51 had nonSTEMI/unstable angina (diabetics = 14, 27.4%) (P = nonsignificant). Among diabetics versus nondiabetics there was greater prevalence (%) of hypertension (78.6% vs. 44.4%), obesity (25.0% vs. 8.3%), abdominal obesity (85.7% vs. 69.4%) and sedentary activity (89.2% vs. 77.8%), and lower prevalence of smoking/tobacco use (10.7% vs. 25.0%) (P < 0.05). In STEMI patients 28 (57.1%) were thrombolysed (diabetes 17.8% vs. 31.9%), percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) was in 67.8% diabetics versus 84.7% nondiabetics and coronary bypass surgery in 21.4% versus 8.3%. At discharge, in diabetics versus nondiabetics, there was similar use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (67.9% vs. 69.4%) and statins (100.0% vs. 98.6%) while use of dual antiplatelet therapy (85.7% vs. 95.8%) and beta-blockers (64.3% vs. 73.6%) was lower (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Diabetic patients with ACS have greater prevalence of cardiometabolic risk factors (obesity, abdominal obesity, and hypertension) as compared to nondiabetic patients. Less diabetic patients undergo PCIs and receive lesser dual anti-platelet therapy and beta-blockers.

Keywords: Acute coronary syndrome, diabetes, management


How to cite this article:
Sharma KK, Mathur M, Lodha S, Sharma SK, Sharma N, Gupta R. Study of differences in presentation, risk factors and management in diabetic and nondiabetic patients with acute coronary syndrome. Indian J Endocr Metab 2016;20:354-8

How to cite this URL:
Sharma KK, Mathur M, Lodha S, Sharma SK, Sharma N, Gupta R. Study of differences in presentation, risk factors and management in diabetic and nondiabetic patients with acute coronary syndrome. Indian J Endocr Metab [serial online] 2016 [cited 2019 May 26];20:354-8. Available from: http://www.ijem.in/text.asp?2016/20/3/354/179990


   Introduction Top


Cardiovascular complications are more common among diabetic patients and are usually associated with a significantly greater risk of morbidity and mortality than in nondiabetic subjects.[1] Presence of diabetes worsens prognosis in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). The relative risk of myocardial infarction (MI) is 50% greater in diabetic men and by 150% greater in diabetic women compared to age-matched nondiabetic subjects.[2] Sudden cardiac death is 50% more frequent in diabetic men and 300% more frequent in diabetic women compared to age-matched nondiabetic controls.[2] Diabetes also influences outcomes following ACS, and therefore, secondary prevention in diabetic individuals is equally critical. Consequently, the diabetic patient needs special management and monitoring, with a view to the prevention, control, and treatment of the various manifestations of coronary artery disease.[3] All patients with ACS require evidence-based treatments such as lifestyle advise and drugs including antiplatelets, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), beta-blockers, and lipid-lowering medications (statins) therapy to prevent death, and secondary complications.[4] This is especially important in patients with diabetes. This study was conducted to assess clinical characteristics, management, and prognosis in ACS patients with or without diabetes presenting to a tertiary care hospital.


   Methods Top


The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee, and individual written consent was obtained from all the patients. Demographic details, clinical characteristics, lifestyle factors, and prescribed treatment were obtained in successive patients presenting to the hospital with a diagnosis of ACS. Diagnosis of ACS was confirmed by the presence of typical chest pain or uneasiness, combined with electrocardiographic changes, and cardiac enzyme elevation. The patients were recruited over a 12-month period from July 2011 to June 2012.

Details of presentation and risk factors had been obtained. Smokers were patients with present smoking or regular nonsmoked tobacco use. Former tobacco users were also identified. Physical activity was classified as mild, moderate, or severe based on the WHO criteria.[5] Overweight was defined as body mass index (BMI) 25.0–29.9 kg/m 2, obesity as BMI ≥30 kg/m 2, abdominal obesity as waist circumference >90 cm in men, and >80 cm in women according to the WHO guidelines.[5] Subjects were defined as hypertensive when a person was either a known hypertensive or had multiple readings over the course of hospitalization of ≥140/90 mmHg.[5] Dyslipidemia was defined according to the National Cholesterol Education Program guidelines.[6] The patients were classified as diabetics if they had been previously diagnosed were receiving hypoglycemic therapy or repeatedly has high fasting blood glucose levels (>126 mg/dL at >2 measurements) during admission. Details of medical and interventional coronary management were prospectively recorded for each patient by interview of patients and treating physicians.

Statistical analysis

SPSS (SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA; version 13.0 for Windows) was used for the data analysis. Numerical variables are reported as a mean and standard deviation. Descriptive statistics is reported. Differences in continuous variables have been determined by independent t-test and χ2 test as used for ordinal variables. P < 0.05 was considered significant.


   Results Top


The CONSORT statement and flowchart of patients in the study are shown in [Figure 1]. Five hundred and fifty patients with ACS were admitted to the hospital. Majority of these patients were transferred from other hospitals more than 5 days after the acute event (n = 389) and 15 (2.7%) died and not included in the study. One hundred and forty-six patients were eligible, and 46 did not agree to participate in the study or had screen failure, and finally, 100 patients were included in this study. The baseline demographic and clinical characteristics are shown in [Table 1]. Mean age was 59.0 ± 10.8 years; it was 59.3 ± 11.6 years in diabetics and 58.9 ± 8.5 years in nondiabetics. Overall, 49 patients had ST-elevation MI (STEMI) while 51 had nonSTEMI or unstable angina. In diabetics as compared to nondiabetics, there was the similar prevalence of STEMI (50.0% vs. 48.6%) as well as nonSTEMI (50.0% vs. 51.4%). Among diabetics versus nondiabetics, there was greater prevalence of hypertension (78.6% vs. 44.4%), obesity (25.0% vs. 8.3%), abdominal obesity (85.7% vs. 69.4%), and physical inactivity (89.2% vs. 77.8%) (P < 0.05). Lifestyle factors in diabetics versus nondiabetics were - smoking and/or tobacco use (10.7% vs. 25.0%), high fat intake (78.6% vs. 76.4%), high salt intake (53.6% vs. 59.7%), high calorie intake (35.7% vs. 48.6%), low fiber intake (64.3% vs. 54.9%), low fruits and vegetables intake (53.6% vs. 52.8%), and alcohol use (3.6% vs. 6.9%) [P = nonsignificant, [Table 1]. Compared to patients without diabetes, diabetic patients had greater mean heart rate and BMI (P < 0.05). Prevalence of obesity, abdominal obesity, and hypertension was also greater in diabetic patients [P < 0.05, [Table 1].
Figure 1: CONSORT statement depicting the study flow

Click here to view
Table 1: Demographic, lifestyle, and clinical characteristics in diabetic and nondiabetic patients with acute coronary syndrome

Click here to view


In STEMI, patients 28 (57.1%) were thrombolysed (diabetics 17.8% vs. 31.9%). In diabetics versus nondiabetics, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was in 67.8% versus 84.7% (P < 0.05) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery was in 21.4% versus 8.3%. At discharge, 91 patients were on dual antiplatelets, aspirin, or thienopyridine (clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor) (diabetics 85.7%, nondiabetics 95.8%), 71 patients were on ACEIs or ARBs (diabetics 71.4%, nondiabetics 70.8%), 71 patients were on beta-blockers (diabetics 64.3%, nondiabetics 73.6%), 99 patients were on lipid-lowering agents (diabetics 100%, nondiabetics 98.6%), 19 patients were on diuretics (diabetics 21.4%, nondiabetics 18.1%), and 7 patients were on calcium channel blockers (diabetics 14.3%, nondiabetics 4.2%) [Table 2].
Table 2: Clinical characteristics, management, and treatment at discharge

Click here to view



   Discussion Top


This study shows that diabetic patients with ACS have a higher prevalence of cardiometabolic risk factors (obesity, abdominal obesity, and hypertension) than nondiabetics, and there was the lower use of PCI. There was the lower use of dual anti-platelet therapies and beta-blockers in patients with diabetes.

Previous studies from India including large registries such as CREATE,[7] Kerala-ACS [8] and DEMAT,[9] have reported on patterns of ACS and therapies. These studies reported that STEMI was responsible for about half of all hospital admissions similar to this study. These studies also report a low use of various cardioprotective agents, especially beta-blockers, during hospitalization and at discharge. These studies did not study diabetic subgroups and our study, although small, is unique to address this question. Long-term follow-up studies from India have reported similar low use of beta-blockers in ACS patients.[10] Studies from developed countries such as multicountry Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) registry as well as British and North American ACS registries have shown similar results.[11],[12],[13],[14] GRACE registry reported that beta-blocker use in diabetics (75.0%) was significantly lower than in nondiabetics (80%).[11] This indicates a physician-level barrier in prescribing beta-blockers to diabetics due to the popular misconception of greater side effects in this group.[12] Lower use of PCI and greater CABG surgery indicates greater prevalence of multivessel disease patients. Our results are similar to studies from other countries.[15]

This is a single-center study with a small sample size, and this is a major study limitation. Moreover, we evaluated patients at a tertiary care hospital, and more than 90% patients underwent some coronary intervention, and the findings may not reflect the general situation in India. Larger and multicentric studies are required to identify patterns of ACS in diabetes, management strategies, outcomes, and secondary prevention therapies. Long-term studies to assess adherence to therapies and lifestyle measures as well as long-term outcomes are also required. Other limitations of the study include lack of assessment of prehospital phase of ACS, details of symptoms, and in-hospital management. Our study is also underpowered to identify the importance of clinical outcomes.


   Conclusion Top


Our study shows that diabetic patients with ACS have greater prevalence of obesity, abdominal obesity, and hypertension. These patients receive lesser PCI, dual antiplatelet therapies, and beta-blockers.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

 
   References Top

1.
American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Statistics. Available from: http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basis/diabetes-statistics/. [Last accessed on 2015 Jun 19].  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Peterson PN, Spertus JA, Magid DJ, Masoudi FA, Reid K, Hamman RF, et al. The impact of diabetes on one-year health status outcomes following acute coronary syndromes. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2006;6:41.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Anselmino M, Bartnik M, Malmberg K, Rydén L; Euro Heart Survey Investigators. Management of coronary artery disease in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Acute management reasonable but secondary prevention unacceptably poor: A report from the Euro Heart Survey on diabetes and the heart. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 2007;14:28-36.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Hasin T, Hochadel M, Gitt AK, Behar S, Bueno H, Hasin Y. Comparison of treatment and outcome of acute coronary syndrome in patients with versus patients without diabetes mellitus. Am J Cardiol 2009;103:772-8.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Luepkar RV, Evans A, McKeigue P, Reddy KS. Cardiovascular Survey Methods. 3rd ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2002.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). 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) final report. Circulation 2002;106:3143-421.  Back to cited text no. 6
[PUBMED]    
7.
Xavier D, Pais P, Devereaux PJ, Xie C, Prabhakaran D, Reddy KS, et al. Treatment and outcomes of acute coronary syndromes in India (CREATE): A prospective analysis of registry data. Lancet 2008;371:1435-42.  Back to cited text no. 7
[PUBMED]    
8.
Mohanan PP, Mathew R, Harikrishnan S, Krishnan MN, Zachariah G, Joseph J, et al. Presentation, management, and outcomes of 25 748 acute coronary syndrome admissions in Kerala, India: Results from the Kerala ACS Registry. Eur Heart J 2013;34:121-9.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Pagidipati NJ, Huffman MD, Jeemon P, Gupta R, Negi P, Jaison TM, et al. Association between gender, process of care measures, and outcomes in ACS in India: Results from the detection and management of coronary heart disease (DEMAT) registry. PLoS One 2013;8:e62061.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Sharma KK, Guptha S, Gupta R. Secondary prevention therapies for coronary heart disease in patients with type 2 diabetes: An audit. J Assoc Physicians India 2012;60:28-30.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Franklin K, Goldberg RJ, Spencer F, Klein W, Budaj A, Brieger D, et al. Implications of diabetes in patients with acute coronary syndromes. The global registry of acute coronary events. Arch Intern Med 2004;164:1457-63.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Prabhakaran D, Yusuf S, Mehta S, Pogue J, Avezum A, Budaj A, et al. Two-year outcomes in patients admitted with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome: Results of the OASIS registry 1 and 2. Indian Heart J 2005;57:217-25.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Rogers WJ, Canto JG, Lambrew CT, Tiefenbrunn AJ, Kinkaid B, Shoultz DA, et al. Temporal trends in the treatment of over 1.5 million patients with myocardial infarction in the US from 1990 through 1999: The national registry of myocardial infarction 1, 2 and 3. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;36:2056-63.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Mandelzweig L, Battler A, Boyko V, Bueno H, Danchin N, Filippatos G, et al. The second Euro Heart Survey on acute coronary syndromes: Characteristics, treatment, and outcome of patients with ACS in Europe and the Mediterranean basin in 2004. Eur Heart J 2006;27:2285-93.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Roe MT, Messenger JC, Weintraub WS, Cannon CP, Fonarow GC, Dai D, et al. Treatments, trends, and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction and percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56:254-63.  Back to cited text no. 15
[PUBMED]    


    Figures

  [Figure 1]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]



 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

   Abstract Introduction Methods Results Discussion Conclusion Article Figures Article Tables
  In this article
 References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed974    
    Printed4    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded255    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal