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

Background:  This study compared differences in the risk factors and clinical outcomes of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and non-DM patients with  de novo  lesions (DNLs) and late or very late stent thrombosis (LST/VLST).   Methods:  We used angiography to screen 4,151 patients with acute coronary syndrome for DNL and LST/VLST lesions. Overall, 3,941 patients were included in the analysis and were allocated to the DM ( n  = 1,286) or non-DM ( n  = 2,665) group at admission. The primary endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), defined as death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, and ischemic stroke, within a median follow-up period of 698 days.   Results:  In the group with a total white blood cell count >10 × 10 9 /L ( P  = 0.004), a neutral granular cell count >7 × 10 9 /L ( P  = 0.030), and neutrophil–lymphocyte ratio >1.5 ( P  = 0.041), revascularization was better for DNL than for LST/VLST lesions. Among DM patients with DNLs, each unit increase in age was associated with a 53.6% increase in the risk of MACEs [hazard ratio (HR): 1.536, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.300–1.815,  P  < 0.0001]. Older age (≥65 years) was associated with a significantly greater risk of MACEs ( P  < 0.0001). Furthermore, each standard deviation (SD) increase in the level of peak white blood cell counts was associated with a 50.1% increase in the risk of MACEs (HR, 1.501; 95% CI, 1.208–1.864;  P  = 0.0002). When stratifying the DM population with DNLs according to the D-dimer baseline and peak levels <0.5 vs. ≥0.5 mg/L, the high D-dimer group at baseline had a 2.066-fold higher risk of MACEs ( P  < 0.0001), and the high peak level D-dimer group had a 1.877-fold higher risk of MACEs ( P  = 0.001) compared to the low-level groups. Among DM patients with LST/VLST, each unit increase in age was associated with a 75.9% increase in the risk of MACEs (HR: 1.759, 95% CI, 1.052–2.940,  P  = 0.032). Furthermore, for each SD increase in the peak D-dimer level, the risk of MACEs increased by 59.7% (HR, 1.597; 95% CI, 1.110–2.295;  P  = 0.041).   Conclusion:  Following successful primary PCI, the measurement of baseline and peak D-dimer values may help identify individuals at high cardiovascular risk. This suggests a potential benefit of lowering D-dimer levels among T2DM patients with DNL. Furthermore, age and the peak D-dimer values may facilitate the risk stratification of T2DM patients with LST/VLST.

frontiers in cardiovascular medicine

Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes With Late/Very Late Stent Thrombosis and de novo Lesions: A Single-Center Observational Cohort Study of Clinical Outcomes and Influencing Factors