English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

OBJECTIVE We tested whether average monthly glycemic burden (AMGB), a marker of hyperglycemia that is a function of the extent and duration that A1C exceeded 7%, indicated greater risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) than traditional A1C measures. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Using a case-control design, we studied 2,456 members of Kaiser Permanente Northwest with type 2 diabetes: 1,228 who experienced a CVD hospitalization, matched on age, sex, and duration of diabetes to 1,228 patients who were not hospitalized for CVD. We calculated AMGB from diabetes diagnosis until CVD hospitalization as a function of the difference between each actual or interpolated A1C measurement and 7%, resulting in an area under the curve estimate of hyperglycemic exposure, adjusted for number of months of observation. We used conditional logistic regression to compare the association between several A1C-based measures of glycemia and CVD, controlling for clinical characteristics and comorbidities. RESULTS AMGB was associated with increased CVD risk of 29% (odds ratio 1.29 [95% CI 1.16-1.44]; P &lt; 0.001), while mean A1C was associated with a 22% risk increase (1.22 [1.09-1.37]; P &lt; 0.001). A1C ever exceeding 7% was associated with increased CVD risk of 39% (1.39 [1.08-1.79]; P = 0.010). No model with a glycemia measure provided substantially more information than an identical model without a glycemia measure. CONCLUSIONS AMGB demonstrated somewhat greater CVD risk than mean A1C, but its clinical usefulness may be limited. A1C ever rising above 7% (53 mmol/mol) was a simple predictor of CVD risk that may have important clinical ramifications for newly diagnosed patients.

The Association Between Different A1C-Based Measures of Glycemia and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease Hospitalization