The choice between coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for revascularisation in patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease, who ...account for 25% of revascularisation procedures, is much debated. We aimed to assess whether all-cause mortality differed between patients with diabetes who had CABG or PCI by doing a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CABG with PCI in the modern stent era.
We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from Jan 1, 1980, to March 12, 2013, for studies reported in English. Eligible studies were those in which investigators enrolled adult patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease, randomised them to CABG (with arterial conduits in at least 80% of participants) or PCI (with stents in at least 80% of participants), and reported outcomes separately in patients with diabetes, with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. We used random-effects models to calculate risk ratios (RR) and 95% CIs for pooled data. We assessed heterogeneity using I(2). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality in patients with diabetes who had CABG compared with those who had PCI at 5-year (or longest) follow-up.
The initial search strategy identified 3414 citations, of which eight trials were eligible. These eight trials included 7468 participants, of whom 3612 had diabetes. Four of the RCTs used bare metal stents (BMS; ERACI II, ARTS, SoS, MASS II) and four used drug-eluting stents (DES; FREEDOM, SYNTAX, VA CARDS, CARDia). At mean or median 5-year (or longest) follow-up, individuals with diabetes allocated to CABG had lower all-cause mortality than did those allocated to PCI (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.52-0.86; p=0.002; I(2)=25%; 3131 patients, eight trials). Treatment effects in individuals without diabetes showed no mortality benefit (1.03, 0.77-1.37; p=0.78; I(2)=46%; 3790 patients, five trials; p interaction=0.03). We identified no differences in outcome whether PCI was done with BMS or DES. When present, we identified no clear causes of heterogeneity.
In the modern era of stenting and optimum medical therapy, revascularisation of patients with diabetes and multivessel disease by CABG decreases long-term mortality by about a third compared with PCI using either BMS or DES. CABG should be strongly considered for these patients.
Objectives To evaluate vascular protection treatment patterns and attainment of the 2003 Canadian Diabetes Association's recommended targets in ambulatory patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods ...Between 2005 and 2006, 3002 outpatients with type 2 diabetes were enrolled by 229 primary health care settings across Canada. Baseline characteristics, therapeutic regimens and treatment success – defined as the achievement of a blood pressure (BP) of 130/80 mmHg or lower, glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) of 7% or lower, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lower than 2.5 mmol/L and total cholesterol/ high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio lower than 4.0 – are reported. Results Overall, 46% of individuals had a BP that was above the Canadian Diabetes Association's recommended target. Of these, 11% were untreated, 28% were receiving monotherapy, 38% were not receiving an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and 16% were not receiving either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker. Optimal A1C levels were achieved in 53% of patients. Of those who did not attain A1C targets, 3% were not on glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy and 27% were receiving monotherapy. A total of 74% of patients were treated with statins. Overall, 64% and 62%, respectively, met the target LDL-C and the target total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio. Statins were not prescribed to 43% of patients with LDL-C above target. Antiplatelet therapy was implemented in 81% of patients. In total, 21% achieved the combined targets for BP, A1C and LDL-C. Interpretation A substantial proportion of patients did not achieve guideline-recommended targets and were not receiving evidence-based therapy for vascular protection two years after publication of the Canadian guidelines. More research is warranted, and novel and effective strategies must be tested and implemented to correct this ongoing treatment gap.
Objective To update the evidence-based recommendations for the prevention and treatment of hypertension in adults for 2010. Options and outcomes For lifestyle and pharmacological interventions, ...randomized trials and systematic reviews of trials were preferentially reviewed. Changes in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality were the primary outcomes of interest. However, for lifestyle interventions, blood pressure lowering was accepted as a primary outcome given the general lack of long-term morbidity and mortality data in this field. Progressive renal impairment was also accepted as a clinically relevant primary outcome among patients with chronic kidney disease. Evidence A Cochrane Collaboration librarian conducted an independent MEDLINE search from 2008 to August 2009 to update the 2009 recommendations. To identify additional studies, reference lists were reviewed and experts were contacted. All relevant articles were reviewed and appraised independently by both content and methodological experts using prespecified levels of evidence. Recommendations For lifestyle modifications to prevent and treat hypertension, restrict dietary sodium to 1500 mg (65 mmol) per day in adults 50 years of age or younger, to 1300 mg (57 mmol) per day in adults 51 to 70 years of age, and to 1200 mg (52 mmol) per day in adults older than 70 years of age; perform 30 min to 60 min of moderate aerobic exercise four to seven days per week; maintain a healthy body weight (body mass index 18.5 kg/m2 to 24.9 kg/m2 ) and waist circumference (less than 102 cm for men and less than 88 cm for women); limit alcohol consumption to no more than 14 standard drinks per week for men or nine standard drinks per week for women; follow a diet that emphasizes fruits, vegetables and low-fat dairy products, dietary and soluble fibre, whole grains and protein from plant sources, and that is low in saturated fat and cholesterol; and consider stress management in selected individuals with hypertension. For the pharmacological management of hypertension, treatment thresholds and targets should be predicated on the patient's global atherosclerotic risk, target organ damage and comorbid conditions. Blood pressure should be decreased to less than 140/90 mmHg in all patients, and to less than 130/80 mmHg in patients with diabetes mellitus or chronic kidney disease. Most patients will require more than one agent to achieve these target blood pressures. Antihypertensive therapy should be considered in all adult patients regardless of age (caution should be exercised in elderly patients who are frail). For adults without compelling indications for other agents, considerations for initial therapy should include thiazide diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (in patients who are not black), long-acting calcium channel blockers (CCBs), angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) or beta-blockers (in those younger than 60 years of age). A combination of two first-line agents may also be considered as initial treatment of hypertension if systolic blood pressure is 20 mmHg above target or if diastolic blood pressure is 10 mmHg above target. The combination of ACE inhibitors and ARBs should not be used, unless compelling indications are present to suggest consideration of dual therapy. Agents appropriate for first-line therapy for isolated systolic hypertension include thiazide diuretics, long-acting dihydropyridine CCBs or ARBs. In patients with coronary artery disease, ACE inhibitors, ARBs or beta-blockers are recommended as first-line therapy; in patients with cerebrovascular disease, an ACE inhibitor/diuretic combination is preferred; in patients with proteinuric nondiabetic chronic kidney disease, ACE inhibitors or ARBs (if intolerant to ACE inhibitors) are recommended; and in patients with diabetes mellitus, ACE inhibitors or ARBs (or, in patients without albuminuria, thiazides or dihydropyridine CCBs) are appropriate first-line therapies. In selected high-risk patients in whom combination therapy is being considered, an ACE inhibitor plus a long-acting dihydropyridine CCB is preferable to an ACE inhibitor plus a thiazide diuretic. All hypertensive patients with dyslipidemia should be treated using the thresholds, targets and agents outlined in the Canadian lipid treatment guidelines. Selected patients with hypertension who do not achieve thresholds for statin therapy, but who are otherwise at high risk for cardiovascular events, should nonetheless receive statin therapy. Once blood pressure is controlled, low-dose acetylsalicylic acid therapy should be considered. Validation All recommendations were graded according to the strength of the evidence and voted on by the 63 members of the Canadian Hypertension Education Program Evidence-Based Recommendations Task Force. All recommendations reported here achieved at least 80% consensus. These guidelines will continue to be updated annually. Sponsors The Canadian Hypertension Education Program process is sponsored by the Canadian Hypertension Society, Blood Pressure Canada, the Public Health Agency of Canada, the College of Family Physicians of Canada, the Canadian Pharmacists Association, the Canadian Council of Cardiovascular Nurses, and the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada.
Background Despite contemporary therapies for acute coronary syndrome (ACS), morbidity and mortality remain high. Low levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol are common among patients ...with ACS and may contribute to ongoing risk. Strategies that raise levels of HDL cholesterol, such as inhibition of cholesterol ester transfer protein (CETP), might reduce risk after ACS. Dal-OUTCOMES is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial designed to test the hypothesis that CETP inhibition with dalcetrapib reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with recent ACS. Design The study will randomize approximately 15,600 patients to receive daily doses of dalcetrapib 600 mg or matching placebo, beginning 4 to 12 weeks after an index ACS event. There are no prespecified boundaries for HDL cholesterol levels at entry. Other elements of care, including management of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, are to follow best evidence-based practice. The primary efficacy measure is time to first occurrence of coronary heart disease death, nonfatal acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina requiring hospital admission, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or atherothrombotic stroke. The trial will continue until 1,600 primary end point events have occurred, all evaluable subjects have been followed for at least 2 years, and 80% of evaluable subjects have been followed for at least 2.5 years. Summary Dal-OUTCOMES will determine whether CETP inhibition with dalcetrapib, added to current evidence-based care, reduces cardiovascular morbidity and mortality after ACS.
Background There are limited data on the contemporary management and outcomes of non–ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients with diabetes in the “real world.” We sought to evaluate ...(1) the temporal changes in the medical and invasive management and (2) in-hospital outcome of NSTE-ACS patients with and without diabetes. Methods We included Canadian patients hospitalized for NSTE-ACS enrolled in 4 consecutive, prospective, multicenter registries: Canadian ACS-I (n = 3259; 1999-2001), ACS-II (n = 1,956; 2002-2003), Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE/GRACE2 n = 7,561; 2004-2007) and Canadian Registry of Acute Coronary Events (n = 1,326; 2008). Participants were stratified by the presence or absence of preexisting diabetes on admission. Temporal changes in patient management and outcomes were evaluated across the 4 registries. Multivariable analyses were performed to determine the independent prognostic significance of diabetes. Results Of the 14,102 NSTE-ACS patients, 4,046 (28.7%) had previously diagnosed diabetes. Patients with diabetes were older; were more likely to have prior cardiac history including myocardial infarction, revascularization, and heart failure; and had worse Killip class and higher GRACE risk score (all P < .001). Over time, there were significant increases in the use of in-hospital coronary angiography and revascularization. However, diabetic patients were less likely to undergo coronary angiography (52.5% vs 57%, P < .001) or revascularization (28.4% vs 33.4%, P < .001). The underuse of invasive procedures in diabetic patients was seen in all registries and was persistent over time. Overall, compared with the group without diabetes, diabetic patients had higher unadjusted rates of in-hospital mortality (3.0% vs 1.6%, P < .001). In multivariable analysis adjusting for components of the GRACE risk score, diabetes remained an independent predictor of in-hospital death (adjusted odds ratio 1.66, 95% CI 1.30-2.11, P < .001). Conclusions Over the last decade, NSTE-ACS patients with diabetes continue to be treated more conservatively, despite evidence that they would derive similar or even greater benefits from aggressive treatment. This underutilization of evidence-based therapies among diabetic patients with NSTE-ACS in the “real world” may partly explain their worse outcome.
Abstract With the objectives of clarifying the concepts related to “cardiometabolic risk,” “metabolic syndrome” and “risk stratification” and presenting practical strategies to identify and reduce ...cardiovascular risk in multiethnic patient populations, the Cardiometabolic Working Group presents an executive summary of a detailed analysis and position paper that offers a comprehensive and consolidated approach to the identification and management of cardiometabolic risk. The above concepts overlap and relate to the atherogenic process and development of type 2 diabetes. However, there is confusion about what these terms mean and how they can best be used to improve our understanding of cardiovascular disease treatment and prevention. The concepts related to cardiometabolic risk, pathophysiology, and strategies for identification and management (including health behaviours, pharmacotherapy, and surgery) in the multiethnic Canadian population are presented. “Global cardiometabolic risk” is proposed as an umbrella term for a comprehensive list of existing and emerging factors that predict cardiovascular disease and/or type 2 diabetes. Health behaviour interventions (weight loss, physical activity, diet, smoking cessation) in people identified at high cardiometabolic risk are of critical importance given the emerging crisis of obesity and the consequent epidemic of type 2 diabetes. Vascular protective measures (health behaviours for all patients and pharmacotherapy in appropriate patients) are essential to reduce cardiometabolic risk, and there is growing consensus that a multidisciplinary approach is needed to adequately address cardiometabolic risk factors. Health care professionals must also consider ethnicity-related risk factors in order to appropriately evaluate all individuals in their diverse patient populations.
Abstract Objectives To determine the long-term effects of changing the amount or source of dietary carbohydrate on quality of life (QOL), symptoms and dietary satisfaction in people with type 2 ...diabetes. Methods Subjects with diabetes treated by diet alone (n=162) were randomly assigned to high-carbohydrate/high-glycemic-index (HGI) diets; high-carbohydrate/low-glycemic-index (LGI) diets; or lower-carbohydrate/high-monounsaturated-fat (LC) diets for 1 year. We measured QOL at baseline and at study's end, and we measured symptoms and dietary satisfaction quarterly. Results The HGI, LGI and LC diets contained, respectively, 47±1, 52±1 and 40±1% energy carbohydrate; 30±1, 27±1 and 40±1% fat with GI 64±0.4, 55±0.4 and 59±0.4. Significantly more participants reported increased flatulence on LGI than on LC and HGI diets at 3 months (41%, 19%, 14%; p<0.05), but not at 12 months (29%, 17%, 17%; ns). Abdominal distension was more severe (46% vs. 14%, 19%; p<0.05), and headache less severe (8% vs. 22%, 23%; p<0.05) on LGI than on both other diets. Increased appetite was more severe on LC (33%) than on HGI diets (14%, p<0.05). Joint/limb pains were less severe on LGI (16%) than HGI (28%) diets. LC elicited more severe gloomy thoughts (23%) than LGI (4%; p<0.05) but greater dietary-satisfaction (70%; p<0.05) than LGI (40%) and HGI (48%) diets. For all diets, glycated hemoglobin (A1C) levels increased less in those who gained less weight, had less increased appetite and were more satisfied with the enjoyment obtained from eating. Conclusions Each diet elicited increased severity of 1 or more symptoms than the other diets. Although overall dietary satisfaction was greater on the 40% carbohydrate diet than on the 50% carbohydrate diet, the LGI diet was no less satisfying than the HGI diet. Changes in appetite and dietary satisfaction may influence body weight and glycemic control, or vice-versa.
Background Despite clear guideline recommendations, there is a growing body of evidence that there is suboptimal use of lipid-lowering treatment in Canadians. Objective To assess the prevalence and ...types of persistent lipid abnormalities in Canadian patients receiving statin therapy. Methods The present cross-sectional study recruited 2436 outpatients 45 years of age or older who were treated with statins by 232 physicians from 10 provinces; all underwent clinical examination and had their latest fasting lipid values while on statin therapy recorded. Results The median patient age was 66 years (interquartile range IQR 58 to 74 years), 60% were men and 80% were in the high 10-year risk category. The median low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level was 2.0 mmol/L (IQR 1.6 mmol/L to 2.5 mmol/L) and the median total cholesterol/ high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio was 3.4 mmol/L (IQR 2.8 mmol/L to 4.1 mmol/L). However, based on the 2006 Canadian Cardiovascular Society recommendations, 37% of all patients did not have a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level at goal or intervention target level, including 45% of high-risk category patients. The majority of patients received atorvastatin (50%) or rosuvastatin (37%) but primarily at low-to-medium doses, and a minority (14%) received additional lipid-modifying therapies. Conclusions The present observational study highlights the need for more intensive treatment of lipid abnormalities, particularly among high-risk patients. Recognizing several important limitations related to the observational nature of the study, the findings suggest the possibility that, in addition to optimizing adherence, there remains an important need to titrate current statin therapy to higher doses and potentially use a combination of lipid-modifying treatments (once the statin dose has been truly maximized) to further bridge the gap between evidence-based medicine and current Canadian practice.
Abstract Background We evaluated the risk assessment and management patterns employed by primary care physicians in patients at elevated cardiometabolic risk. Methods Between April 2011 and March ...2012, multiple physicians from 9 Primary Care Teams (PCTs) and 88 physicians from traditional nonteam (Solo) practices completed a practice assessment on the management of 2461 patients > 40 years old with no clinical evidence of cardiovascular disease and diagnosed with at least 1 of the following: dyslipidemia, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), or hypertension. Results Individuals with dyslipidemia, T2DM, or hypertension tended to have a body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2 . Waist circumference measurements, obtained for only 392/829 (47.0%) Solo patients, revealed that 88.9% of these individuals were abdominally obese and that at least 52.2% of Solo patients had metabolic syndrome. Cardiovascular risk, determined by the physicians for 83.5% of all patients without T2DM and typically performed using traditional risk engines, was often miscalculated (43.2% PCTs, 58.8% Solo; P = 0.0007). Healthy behavioural modifications were infrequently recommended (< 50%). Pharmacotherapy was widely used (> 70%) but treatment targets were infrequently met. The composite outcome of guideline-recommended low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, glycemic, and blood pressure targets was met by 9.0% and 8.1% of patients managed by PCT and Solo physicians respectively. Conclusions Obesity and cardiovascular risk were underassessed and the latter often underestimated. Patients were infrequently counselled on the benefits of healthy behavioural changes. A paradigm change in assessing and managing obesity and cardiovascular risk via aggressive lifestyle interventions is warranted in individuals at elevated cardiometabolic risk.
Abstract Objective To gain insight into the current management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus by Canadian primary care physicians. Method A total of 479 primary care physicians from across ...Canada submitted data on 5123 type 2 diabetes patients whom they had seen on a single day on or around World Diabetes Day, November 14, 2012. Results Mean glycated hemoglobin (A1C) was 7.4%, low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C) was 2.1 mmol/L and blood pressure (BP) was 128/75 mm Hg. A1C ≤7.0% was met by 50%, LDL-C ≤2.0 mmol/L by 57%, BP <130/80 mm Hg by 36% and the composite triple target by 13% of patients. Diet counselling had been offered to 38% of patients. Of the 87% prescribed antihyperglycemic agents, 18% were on 1 non-insulin antihyperglycemic agent (NIAHA) (85% of which was metformin), 15% were on 2 NIAHAs, 6% were on ≥3 NIAHAs, 19% were on insulin only and 42% were on insulin + ≥1 NIAHA(s). Amongst the 81% prescribed lipid-lowering therapy, 88% were on monotherapy (97% of which was a statin). Among the 83% prescribed antihypertensive agents, 39%, 34%, 21% and 6% received 1, 2, 3 and >3 drugs, respectively, with 59% prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and 35% angiotensin II receptor blockers. Conclusions The Diabetes Mellitus Status in Canada survey highlights the persistent treatment gap associated with the treatment of type 2 diabetes and the challenges faced by primary care physicians to gain glycemic control and global vascular protection in these patients. It also reveals a higher use of insulin therapy in primary care practices relative to previous surveys. Practical strategies aimed at more effectively managing type 2 diabetes patients are urgently needed.
PDF
