INTRODUCTION
There has been
considerable debate about the relative merits of a conservative
compared to an invasive approach in non-ST-segment elevation acute
coronary syndrome, particularly since stents began to be used in
coronary angioplasty. The invasive strategy has generally been
preferred. The benefit of such an approach has been demonstrated in
randomized trials1-4 and in observational
registries,5 particularly in high risk subgroups with
ST-segment depression or elevated troponin levels.6,7
The situation is not so clear, however, in diabetic patients. The
FRISC II study found a non-significant tendency towards a better
prognosis in diabetic patients when an invasive strategy was
used,1 whilst in the TACTICS study, although the
absolute difference in the primary endpoint (death, infarction or
re-admission for acute coronary syndrome within 6 months) was
greater in diabetics than in non-diabetics (7.6% vs 2.2%), no
significant differences were observed in terms of relative benefit
between these 2 groups.3,8 However, neither of these
studies took into account diabetic patients' medical treatment, and
results for long-term diabetic patients were not analyzed
separately.
Several factors
could limit the benefits of an invasive strategy in diabetic
patients, including: a) the high prevalence of diffuse
coronary artery disease, which reduces the options for
revascularization9; b) poorer evolution after
angioplasty due to higher rates of restenosis and a more rapid
evolution of atherosclerosis;10 and c) a higher
rate of cardiac and non-cardiac related surgical
mortality.11 All of these situations are more frequent
in long-term diabetic patients, and particularly in
insulin-dependent patients.11,12
The present
study included patients with advanced diabetes, managed using an
invasive strategy, who were sent for a coronary angiogram because
of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome. Optimal
medical treatment was provided together with invasive treatment.
The study objectives were: a) to study the prevalence of
diffuse coronary artery disease and its predictors, and b)
to study the outcomes after 1 year in patients who underwent
revascularization compared to those who did not.
METHODS
Study
Population
This was an
observational, prospective study performed from October 2002 to
June 2004 which included 141 patients from 5 hospitals, 3 of which
had a an interventional unit. All patients had been sent for
cardiac catheterization due to the presence of non-ST-segment
elevation acute coronary syndrome and advanced diabetes mellitus.
The invasive strategy consisted of coronary angiography on
admission and revascularization when the patient's anatomic
characteristics allowed. Diagnosis of acute coronary syndrome was
based on the presence of chest pain and at least one of the
following conditions on admission: a) elevated troponin
levels; b) depressed ST-segment (a minimum of 1 mm in 2 or
more contiguous leads) or T wave inversion (a minimum of 1 mm in 2
or more contiguous leads); c) history of angiographically
documented ischemic heart disease; and d) signs of ischemia
on the stress test when the previous 3 criteria were absent.
Advanced diabetes was defined as either: a)
insulin-dependence prior to admission, or b) at least 5
years of treatment with oral antidiabetic drugs. Patients with
advanced diabetes were included on the basis of results from
earlier studies in which insulin-dependent diabetic patients with
non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome had been shown to
have a poor prognosis, probably as the result of long-term
metabolic disease.13,14 Patients who had been treated
with oral antidiabetic drugs for at least 5 years were included to
increase patient numbers. Patients were excluded if they had renal
insufficiency (creatinine >2.5 mg/dL) or if they had undergone a
revascularization procedure in the previous 6 months.
In all 5
hospitals, an invasive strategy was recommended for this type of
patient, although the final decision regarding the treatment
strategy to follow was left to the interventional cardiologist.
Twenty patients were excluded, 14 because of co-morbidity, 5
because of non-revascularizable disease, and 1 because the patient
refused to participate. A further 3 patients who were scheduled for
inclusion died before catheterization could be
performed.
On admission,
treatment consisted of aspirin 100 mg/day, clopidogrel (300 mg
loading dose and 75 mg daily), and enoxaparin 1 mg/kg every 12 h
given subcutaneously. The use of beta-blockers, statins, and
angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin II
receptor blockers (ARB) was also recommended.
Cardiac
Catheterization
A contrast left
ventriculogram and coronary angiography were performed.
Ventriculography was used to calculate the ejection fraction, with
values of <55% being considered indicative of depressed
ventricular function. Coronary angiography was used to quantify the
extent of coronary artery disease by dividing the coronary tree
into 29 segments using the BARI scheme.15 Each segment
was assigned a score as follows:16 0=normal, 1<30%
stenosis, 2=30%-70% stenosis, 3=70%-90% stenosis, and 4=occlusion.
The total sum of points represented the extent of coronary artery
disease. The number of main vessels (anterior descending,
circumflex and right) with ≥
70% stenosis was also
analyzed, as was the presence of ≥
50% stenosis in the left main
coronary artery. The diameter of the distal beds of the 2 main
vessels, i.e. the anterior descending artery and the other dominant
vessel (right coronary or circumflex), was estimated by comparison
with the catheter (6 Fr in all cases). The distal bed was defined
as narrow if the diameter was less than that of the catheter (2 mm)
in the 2 main vessels. Angiographic analysis was performed by a
single observer (JS) with no prior knowledge of patient
characteristics.
The decision as
to whether to perform angioplasty or surgery was left to the
interventional cardiologist and the surgeon. When a
revascularization procedure was performed, creatine kinase MB
isoenzyme (CK-MB) concentration was determined at 12 h and 24 h
after the procedure.
Follow-Up
A clinical
assessment was performed during outpatient visits at 2, 6, and 12
months. Treatment with aspirin, clopidogrel, statins,
beta-blockers, ACEI, or ARB was recommended during the one year
follow-up period.
The following
events were recorded after catheterization: a) death from
any cause; b) acute myocardial infarction (defined as a new
episode of chest pain with elevated troponin concentrations or
elevated CK-MB in patients with previously elevated troponin
concentrations, or elevation of CK-MB to >3 times normal value
after angioplasty, or >5 times normal values after heart
surgery); and c) readmission for angina, defined as chest
pain of likely coronary origin with ECG, abnormalities or abnormal
stress test, or coronary arteriography results. The primary
endpoint was a combined event of death, acute myocardial
infarction, or readmission for angina.
Statistical Analysis
Both
angiographic and clinical endpoints were used in the study. The
first consisted of the extent of coronary artery disease and the
presence of narrow distal beds, and the second was a combined event
at 1 year.
The relationship
between angiographic and clinical variables was analyzed. Clinical
variables included in this analysis were age, sex, insulin
dependence, active smoking, arterial hypertension,
hypercholesterolemia, family history of ischemic heart disease,
previous coronary angioplasty, previous heart surgery, antecedents
of stroke, peripheral arterial disease and Killip grade >1 on
admission, depressed ST-segment, elevated troponin concentrations,
and left ventricular ejection fraction. In the univariate analysis,
Student's t test for unpaired data was used to compare the
extent of coronary artery disease, introduced as a continuous
variable (number of points), between groups defined by dichotomous
variables. The relationship between the extent of coronary artery
disease and age and ejection fraction was tested using the Pearson
correlation coefficient. Stepwise multiple regression analysis was
used to identify variables which independently predicted the extent
of coronary artery disease; models included all variables which
were statistically significant at P<0.1 in the univariate
analysis, with a probability-of-F-to-enter ≤
0.05 and a
probability-of-F-to-remove ≥
0.1.
The presence of
narrow distal beds in the 2 main coronary vessels was treated as a
dichotomous variable. The univariate analyses were performed using
the χ2 test for categorical variables and Student's
t test for unpaired data for the variables of age and
ejection fraction. In the multivariate analysis, binary logistic
regression was used with the forward conditional method, with a
probability-of-F-to-enter ≤
0.05 and a
probability-of-F-to-remove ≥
0.1.
Due to
differences in the demographic, clinical, and angiographic
characteristics of patients who underwent revascularization
compared to those who did not, a propensity score was used to
assess the likelihood that a patient would undergo
revascularization.17,18 The aim of this score was to
minimize the bias inherent in the decision to revascularize. In
order to avoid the confounding effect of including the 10 patients
without significant coronary stenosis, who were obviously not
revascularized, these were excluded from the analysis of the effect
of revascularization. The propensity score was calculated by
determining which variables were associated with the likelihood of
revascularization (P≤
0.2), and adding age and sex.
Covariants included were insulin-dependent diabetes, smoking,
arterial hypertension, history of hypercholesterolemia, previous
heart surgery, extent of coronary artery disease, narrow distal
beds, interaction between insulin-dependent diabetes and extent of
coronary artery disease, interaction between being male and
hypercholesterolemia, interaction between age and narrow distal
bed, interaction between insulin-dependent diabetes and stroke, and
interaction between peripheral arterial disease and extent of
coronary artery disease. Cox's multivariable regression analysis
was used to analyze the effect of revascularization after adjusting
by the propensity score, which was introduced as a continuous
variable.
Statistical
analyses were performed in SPSS 9.0 and STATA.
RESULTS
Population
Characteristics
The diagnosis of
acute coronary syndrome in the 141 patients included in the study
was based on elevated troponin concentrations in 97 cases (69%), on
depressed ST-segment with normal troponin concentrations in 20
(14%), on T wave inversion with normal troponin concentrations in 8
(6%), on documented angiographic evidence of ischemic heart disease
without elevated troponin concentrations or alterations on the ECG
in 10 (7%), and on induced ischemia in the stress test in 6 (4%).
Table 1 shows the socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of
the study population. The sub-group of 20 patients who were
excluded from the study were significantly different from those
included in terms of age (75±10 vs 68±9 years;
P=.005) and the frequency of Killip grade >1 on admission
(55% vs 16%; P=.0001).

Cardiac
catheterization was performed 4±2 days after admission.
Revascularization was performed in 85 patients (60%), 59 using
coronary angioplasty and 26 using surgery. Drug-eluting stents were
used (rapamycin or paclitaxel) in 73% of the angioplasties, and
abciximab in 36%. At discharge, 92% of patients were receiving
treatment with aspirin, 72% with clopidogrel, 78% with
beta-blockers, 82% with statins, and 81% with ACEI or
ARA-II.
Fifteen patients
died during follow-up (10.6%), 28 (20%) either died or had acute
myocardial infarction, and 39 (27.7%), either died, suffered an
infarction, or were readmitted for angina. Eight infarctions and 1
death were associated with the revascularization procedure. No
patients were lost to follow-up. The sub-group of patients who were
not included had a higher mortality rate (30%; P=.03) and a
higher frequency of the triple combined event (55%;
P=.02).
Angiographic Findings
The mean extent
of coronary artery disease was 16±8 points (median, 17
points). Eighteen patients (12.8%) presented narrow distal beds.
One vessel coronary artery disease was observed in 18 patients
(13%), 2 vessel disease in 29 (20%), and 3 vessel in 84 (60%).
Significant coronary stenosis was not observed in 10 patients (7%).
The mean number of affected vessels was 2.3±1, and
revascularization was performed in a mean of 1±1 vessels.
Revascularization was incomplete in 38 patients (27%). The left
main coronary artery was affected in 9 cases (6%).
Table 2 shows
the relationship between demographic and clinical variables and the
extent of coronary artery disease (points) according to the results
of the univariate analysis. The extent of coronary artery disease
correlated inversely and significantly with ejection fraction
(r=0.37; P=.0001) but did not correlate with age
(r=0.14; P=.1). Stepwise multiple regression analysis
showed an association between the extent of coronary artery disease
and antecedents of heart surgery (β
=0.23; P=.03),
depressed ST-segment (β
=.19; P=.01), Killip
grade >1 (β
=.19; P=.02) and ejection fraction
(β
=.30; P=.0001). The population was then further
divided into 4 groups according to whether they presented 0 (n=36),
1 (n=54), 2 (n=37), or 3 (n=14) of these variables (no patient
presented all 4 variables). The extent of coronary artery disease
(12±7, 15±7, 21±6, and 23±7 points;
P=.0001) increased in parallel with an increase in the number
of predictive variables (Figures 1 and 2), and the differences were
statistically significant between patients with ≥
2 variables compared to
patients with <2 variables. On the other hand, the frequency of
revascularization showed a tendency to decrease (77%, 67%, 57%, and
50%; P=.2) as the number of these predictive variables
increased. This was particularly true of coronary angioplasty (68%,
49%, 27%, and 28%; P=.004).
Figure 1.
Predictive variables of the extent of coronary artery
disease: prior history of heart surgery, depressed ST-segment,
Killip class >1 on admission, and ejection fraction <55%. The
greater the number of predictive variables, the more widespread the
coronary artery disease (12±7, 15±7, 21±6, and
23±7 points; P=.0001), with differences between
patients with 2 or more variables and those with less than 2
variables being statistically significant.
Figure 2.
Example of angiographic findings in a patient with
advanced diabetes and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary
syndrome. This patient showed a depressed ST-segment on the
electrocardiogram and depressed ventricular function (FE=48%).
Widespread coronary artery (26 points) can be observed.
Table 3 shows
the relationship between socio-demographic and clinical variables
and the presence of narrow distal beds using univariate analysis.
Patients with narrow distal beds were older (72±4 vs
67±9 years; P=.06) and had a poorer ejection fraction
(46±13% vs 56±14%; P=.004). Multivariate
analysis showed an association between the presence of narrow
distal beds and prior heart surgery (odds ratio [OR] =5.6; 95% CI,
1.5-20.9; P=.01), depressed ST-segment (OR=6.0; 95% CI,
1.7-21.5; P=.006), and ejection fraction (OR=0.95; 95% CI,
0.91-0.98; P=.009).
Clinical
Evolution
During the one
year follow-up, 10 (22%) non-revascularized patients died compared
to 5 (6%) revascularized patients (P=.01); 14 (30%)
non-revascularized patients either died or suffered an acute
myocardial infarction compared to 14 (17%) revascularized patients
(P=.08); and 21 (46%) non-revascularized patients either
died, suffered an infarction or were re-admitted for angina
compared to 18 (21%) revascularized patients
(P=.005).
Table 4 shows
the differences between revascularized and non-revascularized
patients. The propensity score had an area under the ROC curve of
0.80 (0.72-0.87; P=.0001), which shows that the model
discriminated adequately between revascularized and
non-revascularized patients. Univariate analysis showed that
patients who died, suffered infarction, or were re-admitted for
angina had a lower propensity score (0.59±0.24 vs
0.69±0.23; P=.03). In the Cox multivariate analysis,
revascularization was the only variable which correlated with the
combined event (hazard ratio [HR] =0.43; 95% CI, 0.20-0.90;
P=.02), while there was no significant association between the
combined event and the propensity score (HR=0.90; 95% CI,
0.21-3.80; P=.9).
DISCUSSION
Angiographic Findings in Diabetic Patients With Non-ST-Segment
Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome
Several studies
have highlighted the poorer angiographic profile of ischemic heart
disease in diabetic patients when compared to non-diabetic patients
with a higher prevalence of multi-vessel disease, narrow vessels,
calcification, intracoronary thrombus and more poorly developed
collaterals.19-22 Diffuse coronary artery disease with
narrow vessels is particularly frequent in insulin-dependent
diabetes, possibly because of the longer evolution and greater
severity of the metabolic disease.
Our study
confirms the severity of coronary artery disease in patients with
advanced diabetes and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary
syndrome. Variables associated with the extent of coronary artery
disease were also analyzed, thereby providing information which
could be useful to the intervening cardiologist by providing prior
knowledge of patients who would likely have a poorer anatomical
profile of the coronary arteries and therefore a lower probability
of receiving angioplasty. Variables associated with the extent of
coronary artery disease were: prior history of heart surgery,
depressed ST-segment, and alteration of the ventricular function
reflected in a Killip grade >1 at the time of admission or a
reduction in the ejection fraction in the left ventriculogram.
Patients with 2 or more of these factors had more extensive
coronary artery disease and therefore were less likely to undergo
angioplasty.
The
Invasive Strategy and Revascularization
Diabetes is an
independent predictor of mortality in non-ST-segment elevation
acute coronary syndrome,23-25 particularly in
insulin-dependent diabetes,13,14 and prognosis is
generally poorer in diabetic patients after coronary angioplasty
because of a greater frequency of restenosis,26 again
particularly in insulin-dependent patients.12 The
introduction of drug-eluting stents has advanced the field of
coronary angioplasty by reducing restenosis rates, even in diabetic
patients.27 Nevertheless, some studies suggest that
restenosis rates in insulin-dependent patients are still
considerable.28 Prognosis after heart surgery is also
poorer in diabetic patients, particularly insulin-dependent
patients,11 because of greater co-morbidity and more
extensive coronary artery disease.
All of these
factors may limit the benefits of the invasive strategy in diabetic
patients. Although randomized studies indicate that an invasive
strategy should be used in diabetic patients with non-ST-segment
elevation acute coronary syndrome,1-3,8 it should be
remembered that: a) the results were obtained in a
posteriori subgroup analysis; b) the differences found
were not statistically significant; c) a differential
analysis in patients with advanced diabetes was not carried out;
and d) medical treatment was not controlled for in the
analysis and drug-eluting stents were not used.
In the present
study, advanced diabetes was defined as diabetes which had required
over 5 years of pharmacological treatment, or which required
insulin to achieve metabolic control. Two aspects of patient
treatment stand out: a) medical treatment was optimized, as
indicated by the high frequency of double antiplatelet therapy and
of treatment with beta-blockers, statins, and ACEIs or ARBs; and
b) drug-eluting stents were used in 73% of the
angioplasties. The low use of abciximab can be explained by the
fact that all patients were treated with double antiplatelet
therapy from admission onwards. There were significantly fewer
events in revascularized patients during follow-up, in spite of the
fact that non-revascularized patients received optimal
pharmacological treatment. Although the poorer prognosis in
non-revascularized patients is surely related in part with the
selection of patients with a better anatomical profile for
revascularization, the benefits of the procedure persisted even
after adjusting by the propensity score.
CONCLUSIONS
Patients with
advanced diabetes and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary
syndrome have extensive coronary artery disease. Previous heart
surgery, a depressed ST-segment and poorer ventricular function are
associated with more extensive coronary artery disease. The
follow-up results indicate that revascularization improves
prognosis in these patients.
Limitations
In order to
study the benefits of revascularization, a randomized trial is
necessary in which patients with similar characteristics are
treated using either the invasive or the conservative strategy. In
the present study, the decision to revascularize, which was left to
the individual investigators, introduced confounding variables
which obscure the assessment of the benefits of revascularization
and make it impossible to analyze this objective. Nevertheless, a
propensity score was used to minimize the bias inherent in the
decision to revascularize and after adjusting the predictive
analysis by a propensity score with an adequate discriminatory
power (C statistic=0.80), revascularization during the hospital
stay reduced the likelihood of events after 1 year. On the other
hand, patients with associated morbidity or heart disease which was
known to preclude revascularization were not included in the study.
Finally, due to the fact that the catheterization was performed on
average 4 days after admission, 3 patients who died before
catheterization could be carried out were also excluded from the
study.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are
grateful to the Instituto Valenciano del Corazón (INSVACOR)
for coordinating this study.
Correspondence: Dr. J. Sanchís.
Servei de Cardiologia. Hospital Clínic Universitari.
Blasco Ibáñez, 17. 46010 Valencia.
España.
E-mail: sanchis_juafor@gva.es
Received June
23, 2005.
Accepted for publication January 27, 2006.
References
1. FRISC II investigators. Invasive compared with non-invasive treatment in unstable coronary-artery disease: FRISC II prospective randomised multicentre study. Lancet. 1999;354:708-15.[Medline]
2. Wallentin L, Lagerqvist B, Usted S, Kontny F, Stahle E, Swahn E. Outcome at 1 year alter an invasive compared with a non-invasive strategy in unstable coronary-artery disease: the FRISC II invasive randomised trial. Lancet. 2000:356;9-16.
3. Cannon CP, Weintraub WS, Demopoulos LA, Vicari R, Frey MJ, Lakkis N, et al. Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:1879-87.[Medline]
4. Fox KAA, Poole-Wilson PA, Henderson RA, Clayton TC, Chamberlain DA, Shaw TRD, et al. Interventional versus conservative treatment for patients with unstable angina or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart foundation RITA 3 randomised trial. Lancet. 2002;360:743-51.[Medline]
5. Bodí V, Sanchis J, Llácer A, Facial L, Núñez J, Pellicer M, et al. Estrategia invasiva en el síndrome coronario agudo sin elevación del segmento ST. De los grandes estudios al mundo real. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2004;57:143-50.
6. Diderholm E, Andren B, Frostfeldt G, Genberg M, Jernberg T, Lagerqvist B, et al. The prognostic and therapeutic implications of increased troponin T levels and ST depression in unstable coronary artery disease: The FRISC II invasive troponin T electrocardiogram substudy. Am Heart J. 2002;143:760-7.[Medline]
7. Diderholm E, Andren B, Frostfeldt G, Genberg M, Jernberg T, Lagerqvist B, et al. ST depression in ECG at entry indicates severs coronary lesions and large benefits of an early invasive treatment strategy in unstable coronary artery disease. The FRISC II ECG substudy. Eur Heart J. 2002;23:41-9.[Medline]
8. Cannon Ch, Bruanwald E. Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2001;345:1573-5.
9. Kornowski R, Mintz GS, Lansky AJ, Hong MK, Kent KM, Pichard AD, et al. Paradoxic decreases in atherosclerotic plaque mass in insulin-treated diabetic patients. Am J Cardiol. 1998;81: 1290-394.
10. Alonso JJ, Durán JM, Gimeno F, Ramos B, Serrador A, Fernández-Avilés F. Angioplastia coronaria en el paciente diabético. Situación actual y perspectivas futuras. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2002;55: 1185-200.[Medline]
11. Carson JL, Scholz PM, Chen AN, Peterson ED, Gold J, Schneider SH. Diabetes mellitus increases short-term mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40:418-23.[Medline]
12. Abizaid A, Kornowski R, Mintz GS, Hong MK, Abizaid AS, Mehran R, et al. The influence of diabetes mellitus on acute and late clinical outcomes following coronary stent implantation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:584-9.[Medline]
13. Sanchis J, Bodí V, Llácer A, Facila L, Pellicer M, Bertomeu V, et al. Estratificación del riesgo de pacientes con dolor torácico agudo sin elevación del segmento ST en la puerta de urgencias. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2003;56:955-62.[Medline]
14. Sanchis J, Bodí V, Núñez J, Bertomeu V, Gómez C, Bosch MJ, et al. New risk score for patientes with acute chest pain, non-ST-segment deviation and normal troponin concentrationss. A comparison with the TIMI risk score. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46: 443-9[Medline]
15. Protocol for the bypass angioplasty revascularization investigation. Circulation. 1991;84 Suppl V:1-27.
16. Serrano Martínez M, Palacios M, Lezaun R. Monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 concentration in coronary sinus blood and severity of coronary disease Circulation. 2003;108:75.
17. Ottervanger JP, Armstrong P, Barnathan ES, Boersma E, Cooper JS, Ohman EM, et al. Association of revascularization with low mortality in non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome. Eur Heart J. 2004;25:1494-501.[Medline]
18. Martí H, Pérez-Bárcena J, Fiol M, Marrugat J, Navarro C, Aldasoro E, et al. Análisis de la asociación entre un tratamiento y un acontecimiento de interés en estudios observacionales utilizando la probabilidad de recibir el tratamiento (propensity score). Un ejemplo con la reperfusión miocárdica. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2005; 58:126-36.[Medline]
19. Morgan KP, Kapur A, Beatt KJ. Anatomy or coronary disease in diabetic patients: an explanation for poorer outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention and potential target for intervention. Heart. 2003;90:732-8.
20. Woodfield SL, Lundergan CF, Reiner JS, Greenhouse SW, Thompson MA, Rohrbeck SC, et al. Angiographic findings and outcome in diabetic patients treated with thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: The GUSTO-I experience. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1996;28:1661-9.[Medline]
21. Silva JA, Escobar A, Collins TJ, Ramee SR, White Ch. Unstable angina. A comparison of angioscopic findings between diabetic and non-diabetic patients. Circulation. 1995;92:1731-6.[Medline]
22. Abaci A, Oguzhan A, Hahraman S, Eryol NK, Unal S, Arinc H, et al. Effect of diabetes mellitus on formation of coronary collateral vessels. Circulation. 1999;99:2239-42.[Medline]
23. Malberg K, Yusuf S, Gerstein HC, Brown J, Zhao H, Hunt D, et al. Impact of diabetes on long-term prognosis in patients with unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction: results of OASIS registry. Circulation. 2000;102:1014-9.[Medline]
24. Sanchis J, Bodí V, Llácer A, Facila L, Núñez J, Bertomeu V, et al. Usefulness of concomitant myoglobin and troponin elevation as biochemical marker of mortality in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes. Am J Cardiol. 2003;91:13-6.
25. Sanchis J, Bodí V, Llácer A, Núñez J, Consuegra L, Bosch MJ, et al. Risk stratification of patients with acute chest pain and normal troponin concentrations. Heart. 2005;91:1013-8.[Medline]
26. Marso SP, Giorgi LV, Johnson WL, Huber KC, Laster SB, Shelton Ch J, et al. Diabetes mellitus is associated with a shift in the temporal risk profile of in-hospital death after percutaneous coronary intervention: an analysis of 25223 patients over 20 years. Am Heart J. 2003;145:270-7.[Medline]
27. Sabaté M, Jiménez-Quevedo P, Angiolillo DJ, Gómez-Hospital JA, Alfonso F, Hernández-Antolín R, et al. Randomized comparison od sirolimus-eluting stent versus standard stent for percutaneous coronary revascularization in diabetic patients. The diabetes and sirolimus-eluting stent (DIABETES) trial. Circulation. 2005;112:2175-83.[Medline]
28. Moussa I, Leon MB, Baim D, O'Neill WW, Popma J, Buchbinder M, et al. Impact of sirolimus-eluting stents on outcome in diabetic patients. A SIRIUS substudy. Circulation. 2004;109:2273-8.[Medline]