No abstract

OBJECTIVE -To report the cardiac events in type 2 diabetic outpatients screened for unknown asymptomatic coronary heart disease (CHD) and followed for 5 years.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS -During 1993, 925 subjects aged 40 -65 years underwent an exercise treadmill test (ETT). If it was abnormal, the subjects then underwent an exercise scintigraphy. Of the 925 subjects, 735 were followed for 5 years and cardiac events were recorded.RESULTS -At the entry of the study, 638 of the 735 followed subjects had normal ETT, 45 had abnormal ETT with normal scintigraphy, and 52 had abnormal ETT and abnormal scintigraphy. The 52 subjects with abnormal scintigraphy and ETT underwent a cardiological and diabetological follow-up; the subjects with just abnormal ETT had a diabetological follow-up only. During the follow-ups, 42 cardiac events occurred: 1 fatal myocardial infarction (MI), 20 nonfatal MIs, and 10 cases of angina in the 638 subjects with normal ETT; 1 fatal MI in the 45 subjects with normal scintigraphy; and 1 fatal MI and 9 cases of angina in the 52 subjects with abnormal scintigraphy. In these 52 subjects all cardiac events were significantly more frequent ( 2 ϭ 21.40, P Ͻ 0.0001) but the ratio of major (cardiac death and MI) to minor (angina) cardiac events was significantly lower (P ϭ 0.002). Scintigraphy abnormality (hazard ratio 5.47; P Ͻ 0.001; 95% CI 2.43-12.29), diabetes duration (1.06; P ϭ 0.021; 1.008 -1.106), and diabetic retinopathy (2.371; P ϭ 0.036; 1.059 -5.307) were independent predictors of cardiac events on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS -The low ratio of major to minor cardiac events in the positive scintigraphy group may suggest, although it does not prove, that the screening program followed by appropriate management was effective for the reduction of risk of major cardiac events.

The SINERGIA model is effective in improving metabolic control and major cardiovascular risk factors, while allowing diabetologists to dedicate more time to patients with more acute disease.

We evaluated gender-differences in quality of type 1 diabetes (T1DM) care. Starting from electronic medical records of 300 centers, 5 process indicators, 3 favorable and 6 unfavorable intermediate outcomes, 6 treatment intensity/appropriateness measures and an overall quality score were measured. The likelihood of women vs. men (reference class) to be monitored, to reach outcomes, or to be treated has been investigated through multilevel logistic regression analyses; results are expressed as Odd Ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs). The inter-center variability in the achievement of the unfavorable outcomes was also investigated. Overall, 28,802 subjects were analyzed (45.5% women). Women and men had similar age (44.5±16.0 vs. 45.0±17.0 years) and diabetes duration (18.3±13.0 vs. 18.8±13.0 years). No between-gender differences were found in process indicators. As for intermediate outcomes, women showed 33% higher likelihood of having HbA1c ≥8.0% (OR = 1.33; 95%CI: 1.25–1.43), 29% lower risk of blood pressure ≥140/90 mmHg (OR = 0.71; 95%CI: 0.65–0.77) and 27% lower risk of micro/macroalbuminuria (OR = 0.73; 95%CI: 0.65–0.81) than men, while BMI, LDL-c and GFR did not significantly differ; treatment intensity/appropriateness was not systematically different between genders; overall quality score was similar in men and women. Consistently across centers a larger proportion of women than men had HbA1c ≥8.0%, while a smaller proportion had BP ≥140/90 mmHg. No gender-disparities were found in process measures and improvements are required in both genders. The systematic worse metabolic control in women and worse blood pressure in men suggest that pathophysiologic differences rather than the care provided might explain these differences.

No abstract