Current Diabetes Reports

, Volume 2, Issue 1, pp 16–20 | Cite as

The role of PCI and CABG in the management of coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes

  • Robert L. Frye
  • Malcolm R. Bell
  • Hartzell V. Schaff
  • Richard Holubkov
  • Katherine M. Detre
Article

Abstract

The role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) is evolving. Data from clinical trials and observational studies are reviewed as well as current clinical practice guidelines. The importance of aggressive medical therapy to achieve recommended glycemic control targets, and management of usual risk factors in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) cannot be overemphasized regardless of the revascularization therapy selected. Patients with type 2 diabetes are at increased risk for CAD, which is the cause of death in the majority of patients. Outcomes following PCI and CABG are worse in patients with DM compared to those without DM. This calls for randomized trials and other studies focused on patients with DM.

Keywords

Percutaneous Coronary Inter Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Multivessel Disease Aggressive Medical Management Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Ford ES, DeStephano F: Risk factors for mortality from all causes and from coronary heart disease among persons with diabetes: finding from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey I epidemiologic follow-up study. Am J Epidemiol 1991, 133:1220–1230.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gu K, Cowie CC, Harris MI: Mortality in adults with and without diabetes in a national cohort of the U.S. population, 1971–1993. Diabetes Care 1998, 21: 1138–1145.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mokdad AH, Ford ES, Bowman, et al.: Diabetes trends in the United States 1990-1998. Diabetes Care 2000, 23:1278.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mokdad AH, Serdula M, Dietz B, et al.: The spread of the obesity epidemic in the U.S. JAMA 1999, 282:1519–1522.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    The effect of intensive complication in insulin dependent diabetes mellitus. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group [no authors listed]. N Engl J Med 1993, 329:977–986.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Intensive blood glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patient with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS33). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group [no authors listed]. Lancet 1998, 352:837–853. A true landmark RCT of glycemic control.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Consensus Development Conference on the Diagnosis of coronary heart disease in people with diabetes: 10-11 Feb 1998, Miami, Florida. American Diabetes Association [no authors listed]. Diabetes Care 1998, 21: 1551–1559.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    The BARI Investigators: Comparison of coronary bypass surgery with angioplasty in patients with multivessel disease. N Engl J Med 1996, 335:217–225.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kurbaan AS, Bowker TJ, Ilsley CD, et al.: Difference in the mortality of the CABRI diabetic and nondiabetic populations and its relation to coronary artery disease and the revascularization mode. Am J Cardiol 2001, 87:947–950.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    King SB, Kosinski AS, Guyton, et al.: Eight year mortality in the Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST). J Am Coll Cardiol 2000, 35:1116–1121.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Detre KM, Guo P, Holubkov R, et al.: Coronary revasculariza-tion in diabetic patients; a comparison of the randomized and observational components of the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI). Circulation 1999, 99:633–640. References 8, 9, and 10 represent the major randomized trials comparing CABG and PTCA in multivessel CAD.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Barsness GW, Peterson ED, Ohman EM, et al.: Relationship between diabetes mellitus and long-term survival after coronary bypass and angioplasty. Circulation 1997, 96:2551–2556.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Niles NW, McGrath PD, Malenka D, et al.: Survival of patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease after surgical or percutaneous coronary revascularization: Results of a large regional prospective study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001, 37:1008–1015. A recent and very important observational study confirming original BARI trial results.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gum PA, O’Keefe JH, Borkon AM, et al.: Bypass surgery versus coronary angioplasty for revascularization of treated diabetic patients. Circulation 1997, 96(suppl II):II7-II10.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hansson L, Zanchetti A, Carruthers SG, et al., for HOT Study Group: Effects of intensive blood pressure lowering and low dose aspirin in patients with hypertension: principal results of the Hypertension Optimal Treatment (HOT) randomized trial. Lancet 1998, 351:7155–7162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pyorala K, Pedersen TR, Kjekshus U, The Scandinavian Simvas-tatin Survival Study (4S) Groups, et al.: Cholesterol lowering with simvastatin improves prognosis of diabetic patients with coronary heart disease: a subgroup analysis of the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Diabetes Care 1997, 20:614–620.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Effects of ramipril on cardiovascular and microvascular outcomes in people with diabetes mellitus: results of the HOPE Study and MICROHOPE Substudy. The Heart Outcomes Prevention and Evaluation Investigators [no authors listed]. Lancet 2000, 355:253–259.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Brenner BM, Cooper ME, deZeeur D, et al.: The losartan renal protection study-rational study design and baseline characteristics of RENAAL (Reduction of Endpoints in NIDDM with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan). FRAAS 2000, 1:328–335.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    American Diabetes Association: Aspirin therapy in diabetes (position statement). Diabetes Care 1997, 20:1772–1773.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Marso SP, Lincoff AM, Ellis SG, et al.: Optimizing the percutaneous interventional outcomes for patient with diabetes mellitus: results of the EPISTENT (Evaluation of Platelet IIb/IIIa Inhibitor for Stenting Trial) diabetic substudy. Circulation 1999, 100: 2477–2484.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Corpus RA, George PB, Ajluni SC, et al.: Optimal glycemic control is associated with lower rates of target vessel revascularization diabetics undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001, 37(suppl A):66A.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lazar HL, Chipkin S, Philippdes G: Glucose-insulin-potassium solutions improve outcomes in diabetics who have coronary artery operations. Ann Thorac Surg 2000, 70:145–150.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Malmberg K: Prospective randomised study of intensive insulin treatment on long term survival after acute myocardial infarction in patients with diabetes mellitus. DIGAMI (Diabetes Mellitus, Insulin Glucose Infusion in Acute Myocardial Infarction) Study Group. BMJ 1997, 314: 1512–1515.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Seven-year outcome in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation (BARI) by treatment and diabetic status [no authors listed]. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000, 35:1122–1129.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Detre KM, Lombardero MS, Brooks MM, et al.: The effect of previous coronary artery bypass surgery on the prognosis of patient with diabetes who have acute myocardial infarction. Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigators. N Engl J Med 2000, 342:989–997.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Feit F, Brooks MM, Sopko G, et al.: Long-term clinical outcomes in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation Registry: comparison with the randomized trial. Circulation 2000, 101: 2795–2802.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Newman MF, Kirchner BS, Phillips-Bute B, et al.: Longitudinal assessment of neurocognitive function after coronary artery bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 2001, 344:395–402.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Serruys PW, Unger F, Sousa JE, et al.: Comparison of coronary artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. N Engl J Med 2001, 344:1117–1124.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    O’Neill WW: Multivessel angioplasty should be abandoned in diabetic patients [comment]. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998, 31: 20–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Brener SJ, Ellis SG, Sapp SK, et al.: Predictors of death and reinfarction at 30 days after primary angioplasty: the GUSTO IIb and RAPPORT trials. Am Heart J 2000, 139:476–481.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mak KH, Moliterno DJ, Granger CB, et al.: Influence of diabetes mellitus on clinical outcomes in the thrombolytic era of acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997, 30:171–179.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Williams DO, Holubkov R, Yeh W, et al.: Percutaneous coronary intervention in the current era compared with 1985-1986; the National Hear, Lung, and Blood Institute Registries. Circulation 2000, 102: 2945–2951.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jacobs AK, Brooks MM, Faxon DP, et al.: Has outcome improved in diabetic patients undergoing coronary revascularization? Report from the NHLBI Dynamic Registry and Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation. Circulation 1999, (suppl):1060I–1067I.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kuntz RE: Importance of considering atherosclerosis progression when choosing a coronary revascularization strategy: the diabetes percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty dilemma. Circulation 1999, 99:847–851.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kornowski R, Mintz GS, Kent KM, et al.: Increased restenosis in diabetes mellitus after coronary intervention is due to exaggerated intimal hyperplasia: a serial intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation 1997, 95:1366–1369.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Van Belle E, Bauters C, Hubert E, et al.: Restenosis rates in diabetic patients: a comparison of coronary stenting and balloon angioplasty in native coronary vessels. Circulation 1997, 96:1454–1460.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Standl E, Schnell O: A new look at the heart in diabetes mellitus: from ailing to failing. Diabetologia 2000, 43:1455–1469.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Marso SP, Ellis SG, Gurm HS, et al.: Proteinuria is a key determinant of death in patients with diabetes after isolated coronary artery bypass grafting. Am Heart J 2000, 139:939–944.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jager A, vanHinsbergh VWM, Kostense PJ, et al.: VonWillebrand Factor, C-reactive protein and 5 year mortality in diabetic and non-diabetic subjects: the Hoorn Study. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 1999, 19:3071–3078.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    ACC/AHA guidelines for percutaneous coronary intervention (revision of the 1993 PTCA guidelines): a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001, 37:2239.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Science Inc. 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert L. Frye
    • 1
  • Malcolm R. Bell
  • Hartzell V. Schaff
  • Richard Holubkov
  • Katherine M. Detre
  1. 1.Mayo ClinicRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations