Loading…

Predictive value of admission hyperglycaemia on mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction

Rationale and aim  In patients with an acute myocardial infarction, admission hyperglycaemia (AH) is a major risk factor for mortality. However, the predictive value of AH, when the risk score and use of guidelines‐recommended treatments are considered, is poorly documented. Methods  The first fasti...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Diabetic medicine 2006-12, Vol.23 (12), p.1370-1376
Main Authors: Schiele, F., Descotes-Genon, V., Seronde, M. F., Blonde, M. C., Legalery, P., Meneveau, N., Ecarnot, F., Mercier, M., Penfornis, A., Thebault, L., Boumal, D., Bassand, J-P.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Rationale and aim  In patients with an acute myocardial infarction, admission hyperglycaemia (AH) is a major risk factor for mortality. However, the predictive value of AH, when the risk score and use of guidelines‐recommended treatments are considered, is poorly documented. Methods  The first fasting plasma glucose levels after admission, risk level, guidelines‐recommended treatment use and 1‐year mortality were recorded. Patients with first fasting glucose level after admission > 7.7 mmo/l were considered to have AH. Results  Three hundred and twenty patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 404 with non‐ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) were included. One hundred and seventy‐five (24%) patients had pre‐existing diabetes (diabetes group), 154 (21%) had AH (AH+ group) and the remainding 395 (55%) had neither diabetes nor AH (AH– group). The Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score was lower in the AH– group, but the use of guidelines‐recommended treatment was comparable in all groups. At 1 year, the mortality rate was higher in the AH+ group compared with the AH– group (18.8 vs. 6.1%, P 
ISSN:0742-3071
1464-5491
DOI:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2006.02000.x