2020
DOI: 10.1186/s12933-020-01086-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impacts of triglyceride-glucose index on prognosis of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome: results from an observational cohort study in China

Abstract: Background: The relationship between triglyceride-glucose index (TyG index) and the prevalence and prognosis of cardiovascular disease has been confirmed by former studies. However, it remains uncertain whether TyG index has a prognostic impact in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: The study retrospectively enrolled 798 patients (mean age: 60.9 ± 8.3 years; 68.3% men) with T2… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

7
82
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 108 publications
(90 citation statements)
references
References 62 publications
7
82
1
Order By: Relevance
“…708, p < 0.001]. A similar statistical analysis was performed by Zhao et al, whose AUC value [AUC: covariates, 0.800 vs. covariates + TyG index, 0.856, p < 0.001] was higher than that of our study [25] . We think it may be related to the differences in sample size(798 patients vs. 1932 patients), study subjects(T 2 DM patients with NSTE-ACS who underwent PCI vs. T 2 DM patients with AMI), and endpoint events[(a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal MI and ischemia-driven revascularization) vs. (a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke, cardiac rehospitalization, and revascularization)].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…708, p < 0.001]. A similar statistical analysis was performed by Zhao et al, whose AUC value [AUC: covariates, 0.800 vs. covariates + TyG index, 0.856, p < 0.001] was higher than that of our study [25] . We think it may be related to the differences in sample size(798 patients vs. 1932 patients), study subjects(T 2 DM patients with NSTE-ACS who underwent PCI vs. T 2 DM patients with AMI), and endpoint events[(a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal MI and ischemia-driven revascularization) vs. (a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal MI, non-fatal stroke, cardiac rehospitalization, and revascularization)].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…A study by Ma et al of 776 patients with T 2 DM and ACS who underwent PCI also showed that the TyG index was signi cantly associated with adverse CV outcomes, including all-cause mortality, non-fatal stroke, nonfatal MI and unplanned repeat revascularization [23] . In addition, a study including 798 patients with T 2 DM and NSTE-ACS undergoing PCI reported that 1-unit increase of TyG index was independently associated with higher risk of primary endpoint (a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal MI and ischemia-driven revascularization)[HR: 3.208 per 1-unit increase, 95% Cl: 2.40-4.29, p < 0.001], and the addition of TyG index to a baseline risk model had an incremental effect on the predictive value for adverse prognosis [AUC: baseline risk model, 0.800 vs. baseline risk model + TyG index, 0.856, p < 0.001] [25] . However, the predictive effects of the TyG index on MACCEs in patients with AMI combined with T 2 DM, are still unclear.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Biomarkers have become increasingly important tools helping to improve patient outcome prognosis over the past two decades [20][21][22]. Numerous biomarkers have been identi ed in the diagnosis, prognosis and risk prediction of cardiovascular disease but few have made their way to clinical practice [23].…”
Section: Biomarker's Prognostic Value In Cad Patientsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Over the past two decades, biomarkers have become increasingly important tools that help to improve patient outcome prognosis [22][23][24]. Numerous biomarkers have been identi ed in the diagnosis, prognosis and risk prediction of cardiovascular disease, but few have made their way to clinical practice [25].…”
Section: Prognostic Value Of Biomarkers In Cad Patientsmentioning
confidence: 99%