Diabetes mellitus represents a major risk factor for the development of coronary artery disease and other vascular complications. Glycated haemoglobin, fructosamine, and fasting blood glucose levels are partial parameters to exhaustively describe patient dysglycemic status. Thus, recently the new concept of glycemic variability has emerged, including information about two major aspects: the magnitude of blood glucose excursions (from nadir to peak, thus lower and higher spikes) and the time intervals in which these fluctuations occur. Despite the lack of consensus regarding the most appropriate definition and tools for its assessment, glycemic variability seems to have more deleterious effects than sustained hyperglycemia in the pathogenesis of diabetic cardiovascular complications. This manuscript aimed to review the most recent evidence on glycemic variability and its potential use in everyday clinical practice to identify diabetic patients at higher risk of cardiovascular complications and thus needing stricter monitoring and treatment.
Although the female gender is generally less represented in cardiovascular studies, observational and randomized investigations suggest that-compared with men-women may obtain different benefits from antiplatelet therapy. Multiple factors, including hormonal mechanisms and differences in platelet biology, might contribute to such apparent gender peculiarities. The thrombotic and bleeding risks, as well as outcomes after a cardiovascular event, appear to differ between genders, partly in relation to differences in age, comorbidities and body size. Equally, the benefits of antiplatelet therapy may differ in women compared with men in different vascular beds, during primary or secondary prevention and according to the type of an antiplatelet agent used. This document is an attempt to bring together current evidence, clinical practices and gaps of knowledge on gender-specific platelet function and antiplatelet therapy. On the basis of the available data, we provide suggestions on current indications of antiplatelet therapy for cardiovascular prevention in women with different clinical features; no strong recommendation may be given because the available data derive from observational studies or post hoc/subgroup analyses of randomized studies without systematic adjustments for baseline risk profiles.
Diabetes mellitus is an important risk factor for a first cardiovascular event and for worse outcomes after a cardiovascular event has occurred. Cardiovascular disease in diabetes is a progressive process characterized by early endothelial dysfunction, oxidative stress, and vascular inflammation leading to monocyte recruitment and formation of foam cells and fatty streaks, which cause development of atherosclerotic plaques over years 1. Compared with atherosclerotic plaques from individuals without diabetes, those from patients with diabetes are more vulnerable (rupture-prone), and therefore, these plaques are at increased risk of developing superimposed thrombosis because of increased amounts of soft extracellular lipids, inflammation, and prothrombotic milieu; this situation predisposes patients with diabetes to acute cardiovascular events 1. Consequently, in principle, aggressive antithrombotic therapies might be associated with greater clinical benefit in patients with diabetes than in those without the condition. However, the ischaemic protection provided by antithrombotic drugs must be weighed against the drug-related bleeding risk. This Consensus Statement from the Working Group on Thrombosis of the Italian Society of Cardiology provides up-to-date recommendations on primary and secondary prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with diabetes. We explore the mechanisms of platelet and coagulation activity and analyse the current data on the risk-benefit balance of antiplatelet therapy
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.