Next Article in Journal
Personalized Management of Patients with Chronic Rhinosinusitis with Nasal Polyps in Clinical Practice: A Multidisciplinary Consensus Statement
Previous Article in Journal
TMS Database Registry Consortium Research Project in Japan (TReC-J) for Future Personalized Psychiatry
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JPM
Volume 12
Issue 5
10.3390/jpm12050845
jpm-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

The Impact of Hypoglycemic Therapy on the Prognosis for Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

by
K. Yu. Nikolaev
1,
A. I. Shevela
2,
S. V. Mustafina
1,
O. D. Rymar
1,
A. K. Ovsyannikova
1,
E. M. Zelenskaya
2,
A. Y. Kovaleva
2,* and
G. I. Lifshits
2
1
Institute of Internal and Preventive Medicine—Branch of Institute of Cytology and Genetics, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, 175/1 Borisa Bogatkova Str., Novosibirsk 630089, Russia
2
Institute of Chemical Biology and Fundamental Medicine, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 8 Ak. Lavrentiev, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Pers. Med. 2022, 12(5), 845; https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12050845
Submission received: 9 April 2022 / Revised: 12 May 2022 / Accepted: 18 May 2022 / Published: 22 May 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Personalized Therapy and Drug Delivery)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The article discusses particular circumstances of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). In addition, the available literature data and clinical guidelines reflecting the role of hypoglycemic therapy as a cardioprotection factor in ACS are analyzed. The article considers possible protective molecular mechanisms of various groups of drugs in ischemic cardiomyocytes.

1. Introduction

Nowadays, cardiovascular diseases affect approximately 32.2% of all patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and are currently the main cause of death among people with type 2 diabetes [1]. Hyperglycemia and diabetes mellitus in patients with ACS are a strong predictor of poor prognosis for such patients [2]. It is a well-known fact that T2DM contributes significantly to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. A large meta-analysis Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration (700,000 people) revealed that T2DM increases the risk of coronary heart disease, major stroke and death associated with other cardiovascular causes by two times [3]. Hyperglycemia on hospital admission is an important risk factor for hospital complications in patients with ACS. Blood glucose control with acute insulin infusion is especially important during the acute of post-ACS [4]. The impact of glycemic control on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ACS and T2D remains an open question [5]. Moreover, the effects of type 2 diabetes mellitus medications on secondary prevention after ACS also remain unclear [6]. In this regard, the purpose of this review is to assess the impact of hypoglycemic therapy on the prognosis for ACS in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Risk factors for the development and progression of ACS are known, but the exact pathophysiological mechanisms underlying myocardial infarction (MI) in diabetes are unknown [7].
It is known that diabetes is a predictor of abnormal progression of ACS. The peculiarity of its clinical symptoms in patients with type 2 diabetes is a pain syndrome that is less severe than usual, which leads to abnormal symptoms or painless myocardial ischemia. This phenomenon can be explained by autonomic neuropathy, which leads to the increased threshold of ischemic pain perception [8]. Diabetic cardiomyopathy (DCM) is a definite complication of diabetes mellitus. The accumulated statistics showed that diabetes mellitus causes functional and structural changes in the heart, regardless of arterial hypertension, coronary artery atherosclerosis, or any other known heart disease, giving self-evident support for the existence of DCM [9]. One of the main theories of DCM causality is diabetic neuropathy, which leads to sympathetic ablation affecting myocardial blood flow (MBF), which affects its perfusion and results in the absence of symptoms such as chest pain [10].
Patients with abnormal clinical picture are less likely to have a diagnosis of confirmed MI at the time of admission to the hospital; and they have a higher level of in-hospital mortality than patients complaining about their chest pain. Despite abnormal symptoms, these patients do not differ substantially from those with ACS-type chest pain, increased levels of troponins or severity of coronary stenosis [8]. Mortality after ACS among patients with T2D is higher than that in patients without diabetes. Such difference may be related to the degree of atherosclerosis, as the progression of diabetes is characterized by endothelial dysfunction and changed energy metabolism, which cause atherosclerosis in medium- and large-bore arterial vessels, thus causing injuries to coronary and peripheral arteries. In addition, atherosclerotic plaques tend to appear at an earlier time interval and progress faster [11]. Also, a higher mortality rate among patients with T2D may be related to the size of the left ventricular remodeled area, as well as the incidence of severe ventricular arrhythmias [8]. It is known that insulin resistance in type 2 diabetes can lead to decreased regenerative potential of cardiac muscle cells after ischemia. However, it is not clear whether insulin resistance is a predictor of adverse outcomes in patients with T2D and ACS [12].
The metabolism is almost entirely based on fatty acids in a diabetic. In ACS with insulin resistance, the cellular metabolism of the heart becomes completely dependent on fatty acids, which increases the oxygen demand of the cells, followed by cell necrosis and apoptosis. This partly explains the higher mortality after myocardial infarction [13]. Apoptotic myocyte loss promotes progressive cardiac remodeling through left ventricular enlargement and interstitial fibrosis, which leads to an increase in type III collagen synthesis by cardiac fibroblasts [7].
Endothelial dysfunction in diabetic patients leads to increased proliferation of smooth muscle cells after vascular injury. Thus, patients with T2DM are most likely to experience restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention. The process of restenosis begins very early (one to three months after coronary angioplasty) [14]. High admission glucose is associated with a more hemodynamically unstable patient group with myocardial infarction and larger infarct size and high early mortality. Elevated HbA1c in patient with ACS is associated with more adverse baseline characteristics and a more gradual higher mortality over time [15]. There is ongoing discussion that higher HbA1c is a potential indicator of in-hospital mortality in ACS patients. Also, a high level of HbA1 is a predictor of short-term mortality in patients with ACS without established DM and without DM [2]. The mechanism of association between HbA1c and increased mortality in patients with ACS is still unknown. Higher levels of HbA1c reflect excessive intracellular protein glycosylation in cardiac myocytes such as CaMKII [16]. Zhang et al. showed that the initial level of fibrinogen in plasma is associated with the level of HbA1c in patients with ACS [17]. As the reader might be aware, fibrinogen is an important part of coronary thrombosis. It confirms that hyperglycemia is associated with increased mortality rates during ACS. Thus, it remains unclear whether hyperglycemia is a marker or mediator of high mortality and whether treatment of hyperglycemia affects the well-being outcome [18].
Glucose control is an important factor in the management of ACS in diabetic patients. Patients with diabetes presenting with hyperglycemia (≥10–11 mmol/L [180–198 mg/dL]) in the setting of an acute MI have been found to have an increased risk of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2–2.4) [19]. Kosiborod M et al., in a study of 16,871 patients with acute myocardial infarction, showed that patients with hospitalized glucose levels > 200 mg/dL had a higher risk of in-hospital mortality than patients with an average level (<110 mg/dL) (OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.81–9.26) [20]. Therefore, it is important to consider tight insulin glycemic control to be considered in ACS patients with significant hyperglycemia (>180 mg/dL) [21]. A tight glycemic control during an acute ischemic damage is associated with an increased regenerative potential of the myocardium [22]. Good glycemic control during cardiac rehabilitation after ACS has a positive effect on the increased oxygen consumption peak (VO2 peak) regardless of the antidiabetic therapy used [23]. Patients with type 2 diabetes after ACS are at an increased risk of recurrent cardiovascular events. The choice of optimal hypoglycemic therapy depends on the patient’s metabolic profile (severe insulin resistance and insulin deficiency). It is important to note that increased mortality due to cardiovascular events associated with hypoglycemia suggests the need to restrict long-term use of drugs that affect insulin secretion (sulfonylurea medications and insulin) [24].
One of the glucometabolic strategies in ACS is associated with the infusion of insulin, glucose and potassium (GIK). It was believed that the simultaneous administration of potassium and insulin reduces the risk of ventricular arrhythmias, and insulin facilitates the transport of potassium into the cell. Glucose provides a more efficient energy metabolism than free fatty acids or ketone bodies. However, recent large studies, CREATE-ECLA or OASIS-6 GIK, have shown that GIK infusion has no effect on mortality, cardiac arrest, or cardiogenic shock in ACS. Moreover, it has been shown that such therapy may even be harmful in the early stages of ACS due to hyperkalemia. Another important problem with the GIK concept is explained in the CREATE-ECLA study: despite insulin administration, mean glucose levels increased during therapy from 162 mg/dL (9 mmol/L) to 187 mg/dL (10.4 mmol/L) after 6 h of the introduction of GIK. Since glucose levels are independently associated with mortality, a glucometabolic strategy that raises her glucose levels and therefore goes in the wrong direction can be interpreted as a positive result for a testable hypothesis [25].

2. Discussion

The impact of glycemic control on cardiovascular outcomes and the best approach to treat hyperglycemia during and following an acute cardiovascular event remain a matter of debate in resent time [5].
In the treatment of ACS affected by type 2 diabetes, due consideration should be given to the fact that patients take a large number of various drugs. In the American cross-examination of 875 patients with type 2 diabetes, half of the respondents said they used to take at least seven prescription drugs, and 49% said they used to take two or more antihyperglycemic drugs. In addition to antihyperglycemic drugs, most often the respondents used to take antihypertensive drugs (71% of respondents) and drugs for hyperlipidemia (53%) [8]. Given these data, it is important to consider glycemic effects of cardioprotective drugs, as well as effects of antihyperglycemic drugs on the cardiovascular system. For instance, thiazolidinediones can cause fluid retention, thereby contributing to the development of congestive cardiac failure (CCF). The main clinical effects of diabetic drugs on the cardiovascular system and renal failure are shown in Table 1.

3. Metformin

Metformin is the most commonly prescribed antihyperglycemic drug of the biguanide class that is considered the “gold standard” for the treatment of T2D. At the moment, it is preferable to prescribe metformin as initial treatment for those patients who have not previously taken hypoglycemic therapy; and then they shall take metformin as long as possible. The American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) call metformin a drug of choice for glycemic control of diabetes mellitus [26]. Metformin reduces hyperglycemia, suppresses hepatic gluconeogenesis, and increases insulin sensitivity. Although the exact mechanism of metformin’s action is not completely understood, its ability to stimulate phosphorylation and, therefore, to activate the AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) is considered central to its mode of action and leads to inhibition of gluconeogenic genes [27].
Experimental data indicate metformin’s favorable effects on the left ventricular function. These effects are largely mediated by activation of the ATP-activated protein kinase, which plays a key role in such biochemical processes as glycolysis, oxidative phosphorylation of fatty acids, mitochondrial biogenesis, and glucose uptake. These processes contribute significantly to increase ATP levels and to restore myocardial contractility. AMPK also activates endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) and promotes autophagy, thereby preventing inflammation and necrocytosis. In diabetic patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), retrospective analyses showed that their treatment with metformin is associated with reduced necrotic size as compared with patients not receiving metformin, implicating beneficial effects beyond glucose control. A recent GIPS-III randomized trial showed that metformin may improve left ventricular function following STEMI even in patients without diabetes [28]. However, nowadays there is no evidence of any randomized placebo-controlled trials to evaluate the efficacy in patients with type 2 diabetes and ACS. Single studies showed that metformin reduced all-cause mortality after 2-year follow-up and lowered the risk of recurrent CV events after five-year follow-up among patients with type 2 diabetes and ACS [6,29]. The survival benefit of metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes and ACS has been investigated in several retrospective analyses. Glyburide monotherapy increased the risk of death by 2.5-fold in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing emergency PCI compared with metformin. The study Jørgensen et al. had a small sample size in both groups (129 participants and 47 participants received metformin and glyburide therapy, respectively), and there was no covariant adjustment for renal function, T2D duration, HbA1c, serum LDL-C level, antiplatelet therapy, and smoking status [30]. Komaru et al. demonstrated what patients with ACS and T2D receiving metformin during the acute phase of their ACS event showed a significantly lower incidence of recurrent CVD compared with those who did not receive metformin [6]. Currently, metformin is contra-indicated in patients with diabetes mellitus and ACS due to the risk of tissue hypoxia and understudied effects on early and long-term clinical outcomes of ACS [57]. In addition, in case of ACS affected by type 2 diabetes, a rare but life-threatening adverse reaction (metformin-associated lactic acidosis) may occur [58]. However, some authors postulate that the cardioprotective effects of this medication may outweigh the risks in patients with ACS [6].

4. Sulfonylureas

The hypoglycemic effect of sulfonylurea drugs is based on the stimulation of pancreatic β-cells, which leads to increased endogenous insulin secretion. On the β-cell membrane, the drug molecule binds to the receptor associated with ATP-dependent potassium channels, which results in the β-cell insulin release. However, with prolonged treatment, stimulating effects of these drugs decline. It is assumed that this phenomenon is due to a drop in the number of receptors on the surface of β-cells [43]. In the available literature, we did not find any information on the effect of these drugs on the progress of ACS in type 2 diabetes. The effect of these drugs on the occurrence of cardiovascular events is not clearly known yet. The observational studies provide evidence for increased CV risks during treatment with sulfonylureas, while the results of randomized controlled trials indicate that there is no increase in risk of cardiovascular complications during treatment with sulfonylureas [24]. One possible explanation for such conflicting information is the fact that these drugs are bound together regardless of the fact that their pharmacological and pharmacokinetic properties have some differences. For example, gliclazide seems to bind selectively to pancreatic receptors, while glyburide binds non-selectively to pancreatic and myocardial receptors. Such bonds to myocardial receptors may reduce protective effects of ischemic conditioning. Therefore, the association of glyburide with cardiomyocyte sulfonylurea receptors may contribute to the extension of myocardial infarction, as well as reduction of the left ventricle functional activity [44].

5. DPP-4 Inhibitors

Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4i) are a class of drugs that prevent degradation of incretin hormones (i.e., glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1)) and increase insulin secretion, and also inhibit glucagon release [40]. The group of DPP4i drugs is heterogeneous by the nature of its effect on the cardiovascular system. For instance, sitagliptin reduces cardiac apoptosis and cardiac muscle fibrosis in renal hypertension. In addition, it contributes to autophagy, which has a protective effect on vascular endothelial cells. As a result of monitoring patients with type 2 diabetes after ACS, the frequency of repeated heart attacks, pulmonary edema, and acute renal failure at the hospital stage of treatment significantly decreased during treatment with sitagliptin. [41]. The ESPECIAL-ACS study showed that six-month treatment with sitagliptin helps to stabilize coronary atherosclerotic plaques in patients with type 2 diabetes after ACS [42].

6. Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 (GLP1) Agonists

An improvement in beta-cell function may be of prognostic importance in patients with MI. GLP-1 has beneficial effects on the myocardium by increasing myocardial glucose uptake, improving endothelial function and potentially reducing infarct size; it also has anti-inflammatory and anti-atherogenic properties [36]. The mechanism of GLP-1 is associated with stimulation of insulin secretion and suppression of glucagon in a glucose-dependent manner. GLP1 receptors agonists are a class of parenteral hypoglycemic drugs that activate GLP1 endogenous incretin receptors. The mechanism of effect of this group is based on inhibition of glucagon secretion, ensuring insulin release in response to hyperglycemia, also leading to delayed gastric emptying, which provides for enhanced satiety. These drugs have an anti-inflammatory effect in blood vessels, have an antihypertensive action, improve endothelial function, and have an experimentally determined effect on reducing myocardial infarction size [37]. Glycemic variability (GV) is an independent cardiovascular risk factor in patients with ACS. Glucose levels below 90 mg/dL (5 mmol/L) and above 180 mg/dL (10 mmol/L) should be avoided in patients with an acute coronary syndrome. In addition, it is important not only to maintain glucose levels within these values, but also to reduce short-term GV, since it is associated with an increase in MACE in these patients. Describe the beneficial effect of GLP-1 agonists in short-term GV and oxidative stress in the initial period of ACS [38]. The ELIXIA trial evaluated the effect of GLP1 agonist lixisenatide on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes after ACS. The trial determined that the use of this drug had little impact on the prognosis in patients with T2D and ACS, compared to the placebo control [39].

7. Insulin Therapy

Randomized studies demonstrated inconsistent results regarding the benefit of intravenous insulin for glycemic control in patients with ACS [45].
In the heart, insulin controls glucose transport, glycolytic speed, glycogen synthesis, growth, contractility of cardiomyocytes and their survival, acting mainly through insulin receptor subunit (IRS-1/2) proteins, phosphoinositide-3-kinase (PI3K), Akt (5) and the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling pathway [46]. Hyperglycemia in ACS leads to increased oxygen consumption by the heart cells and a more severe ischemic condition. Insulin lowers glucose levels and limits the bad effects of hyperglycemia. In addition, insulin utilizes myocardial glucose and reduces the concentration of free fatty acids due to the inhibitory effect of insulin on lipolysis [47]. The introduction of insulin protects the myocardium in the ischemic and reperfusion phases. Insulin administration creates conditions for an “optimal environment” by the effects of glucose, the anti-inflammatory action of insulin, and its action on NO synthesis [13]. The hypoglycemia in the insulin-treated patients may be having an adverse effect. Several studies have associated hypoglycemia (plasma glucose ≤ 3.9 mmol/L) with an increase in cardiovascular mortality, including those following an ACS [48]. Hypoglycemia often occurs during insulin therapy (10–22%). Hypoglycemia has adverse physiological effects: hypercoagulability, inflammatory response, and QT interval prolongation [49]. In patients with T2D, in response to hypoglycemia, the sympathoadrenal system is triggered, which has hemodynamic, hemostatic, hemorheological, and electrophysiological effects, which can lead to myocardial ischemia, arrhythmias and sudden death. Therefore, in the treatment of such patients with ACS, insulin is recommended to use only when strictly necessary [50]. However, some investigators demonstrate that basal-bolus correction insulin regimen with glycemic target < 200 mg/dL in patients with ACS could lead to a hypoglycemic risk very close to zero (0.24%), with a significant reduction in hypoglycemia-related clinical events [51]. Some scientific societies agree about the need for intravenous insulin therapy with concomitant infusion of glucose solution to target a blood glucose level of 1.40–1.80 g/L [52,53]. The aim of the DIGAMI study was to investigate the long-term prognosis in diabetic patients with ACS receiving continuous intravenous (IV) insulin for glucose control [54]. Insulin-glucose infusion was carried out within 24 h after hospitalization and subsequent insulin therapy after discharge. The annual mortality was 18.6% in the infusion group compared to 26.1% in the control group. The main benefit was seen during the early post-infarction period, namely a trend of reduced rates of heart failure [55]. Subsequent reports confirmed these observations, showing an absolute 11% reduction in long-term mortality (three to four years) in patients allocated to insulin-glucose infusion. The best outcomes were in low-risk patients with high admission blood glucose and with no prior insulin treatment [25]. Later, the DIGAMI 2 study (1253 patients) compared the three treatment protocols: (1)-infusion of insulin and glucose within 24 h after hospitalization, followed by long-term insulin therapy; (2) infusion of insulin-glucose followed by standard glucose control; and (3) standard metabolic treatment according to local practice. The DIGAMI 2 study did not support the hypothesis that an insulin treatment strategy reduces mortality in type 2 diabetic patients after MI. There is an explanation for this result. Thus, the overall mortality in DIGAMI 2 was lower than expected. This may be since concomitant treatments were performed better than in the first study. Thus, 70% of patients were treated with statins in the second trial and only 8% in DIGAMI 1. In addition, the three strategies did not result in a significant difference in glucose control among patients. Target glucose levels were not achieved in group 1. However, the levels in all groups were significantly better than in DIGAMI 1. The study had to be terminated early due to a slow recruitment rate, resulting in a drop in statistical power below 50% [59]. Currently, the effectiveness of combination therapy of insulin with other antihyperglycemic drugs in patients with ACS for the prevention of hypoglycemia is being studied. There is evidence that adding vildagliptin (DPP4i) to insulin therapy during ACS can significantly reduce hypoglycemic events while maintaining acceptable blood glucose levels [60].

8. Sodium Glucose Transporter Inhibitors (SGLT-2)

In the available literature, we did not find any information on the effect of these drugs having glycosuric effect on the prognosis of ACS in in diabetics [32]. However, the EMPA-REG study demonstrated that treatment with the SGLT-2 inhibitor empagliflozin in combination with metformin reduces cardiovascular mortality by 38% in patients with T2D and high cardiovascular risk [33]. Dapagliflozin has been shown to be effective in reducing the risk of hospitalization for chronic heart failure (CHF) in patients with type 2 diabetes in the study DECLARE TIMI 58. DAPA-HF is the first clinical study in which dapagliflozin was prescribed not for the purpose of correcting diabetes but for the treatment of CHF with low ejection fraction [34]. Dapagliflozin reduces glucose reabsorption goats, increases its excretion in the urine, which leads to a decrease in the concentration of glucose in the blood cheek and after meals. Dapagliflozin has no effect on endogenous glucose production. The beneficial effect of SGLT-2 on the cardiovascular system and kidneys can be explained by glucosuria and natriuresis (decrease in plasma volume, pre-and afterload on the heart, decrease in blood pressure and arterial wall stiffness, decrease in intraglomerular pressure and glomerular hyperfiltration) [35].

9. Conclusions

Thus, for the present, the problem of using hypoglycemic therapy to reduce the risk of cardiovascular complications in patients with T2D and ACS persists. The effect of metformin on early and long-term clinical outcomes of ACS is not well known, insulin therapy is associated with potentially dangerous hypoglycemia in ACS, and the use of other antihyperglycemic drugs to prevent cardiovascular events in the above category of patients remains understudied.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, K.Y.N. and A.I.S.; methodology, S.V.M.; software, O.D.R.; validation, A.K.O., and E.M.Z.; formal analysis, A.I.S.; investigation, K.Y.N.; resources, A.Y.K.; data curation, G.I.L.; writing—original draft preparation, K.Y.N. and A.Y.K.; writing—review and editing, A.Y.K.; visualization, S.V.M.; supervision, A.I.S.; project administration, G.I.L. and K.Y.N.; funding acquisition, G.I.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Russian state-funded project for Institute of Chemical Biology and Fundamental Medicine of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences grant number 121031300045-2. And this research was funded by Research Institute of Internal and Preventive Medicine—Branch of the Institute of Cytology and Genetics, Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences grant number 122031700094-5. «Epidemiological monitoring of the health status of the population and the study of molecular genetic and molecular biological mechanisms for the development of common therapeutic diseases in Siberia to improve approaches to their diagnosis, prevention and treatment».

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Einarson, T.R.; Acs, A.; Ludwig, C.; Panton, U.H. Prevalence of cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes: A systematic literature review of scientific evidence from across the world in 2007–2017. Cardiovasc. Diabetol. 2018, 17, 83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Pan, W.; Lu, H.; Lian, B.; Liao, P.; Guo, L.; Zhang, M. Prognostic value of HbA1c for in-hospital and short-term mortality in patients with acute coronary syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cardiovasc. Diabetol. 2019, 18, 169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. The Emerging Risk Factors Collaboration; Sarwar, N.; Gao, P.; Seshasai, S.R.; Gobin, R.; Kaptoge, S.; Di Angelantonio, E.; Ingelsson, E.; Lawlor, D.A.; Selvin, E.; et al. Diabetes mellitus, fasting blood glucose concentration, and risk of vascular disease: A collaborative meta-analysis of 102 prospective studies. Lancet 2010, 375, 2215–2222, Erratum in Lancet 2010, 376, 958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Katz, P.; A Leiter, L.; Mellbin, L.; Rydén, L. The clinical burden of type 2 diabetes in patients with acute coronary syndromes: Prognosis and implications for short- and long-term management. Diabetes Vasc. Dis. Res. 2014, 11, 395–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Avogaro, A.; Bonora, E.; Consoli, A.; Del Prato, S.; Genovese, S.; Giorgino, F. Glucose-lowering therapy and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and acute coronary syndrome. Diabetes Vasc. Dis. Res. 2019, 16, 399–414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Komaru, Y.; Takeuchi, T.; Suzuki, L.; Asano, T.; Urayama, K.Y. Recurrent cardiovascular events in patients with newly diagnosed acute coronary syndrome: Influence of diabetes and its management with medication. J. Diabetes Complicat. 2020, 34, 107511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Sasso, F.C.; Rinaldi, L.; Lascar, N.; Marrone, A.; Pafundi, P.C.; Adinolfi, L.E.; Marfella, R. Role of Tight Glycemic Control during Acute Coronary Syndrome on CV Outcome in Type 2 Diabetes. J. Diabetes Res. 2018, 2018, 3106056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Toth, P.P. Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients with Diabetes. J. Fam. Pract. 2017, 66 (Suppl. S12), 1217. [Google Scholar]
  9. Jermendy, G. Clinical consequences of cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy in diabetic patients. Acta Diabetol. 2003, 40 (Suppl. S2), S370–S374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Debono, M.; Cachia, E. The impact of Cardiovascular Autonomic Neuropathy in diabetes: Is it associated with left ventricular dysfunction? Auton. Neurosci. 2007, 132, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Bednarska, J.; Bednarska-Chabowska, D.; Adamiec-Mroczek, J. Coronary artery disease: New Insights into revascularization treatment of diabetic patients. Adv. Clin. Exp. Med. 2017, 26, 1163–1167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Khafaji, H.A.H.; Al Suwaidi, J.M. Atypical presentation of acute and chronic coronary artery disease in diabetics. World J. Cardiol. 2014, 6, 802–813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Halimi, S. Place de l’insuline à la phase aiguë des maladies coronaires [Insulin in acute coronary syndromes]. Arch. Mal. Coeur Vaiss. 2004, 97, 63–70. (In French) [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  14. Armstrong, E.J.; Rutledge, J.C.; Rogers, J.H. Coronary artery revascularization in patients with diabetes mellitus. Circulation 2013, 128, 1675–1685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Timmer, J.R.; Hoekstra, M.; Nijsten, M.W.; van der Horst, I.C.; Ottervanger, J.P.; Slingerland, R.J.; Dambrink, J.-H.E.; Bilo, H.J.; Zijlstra, F.; Hof, A.W.V. Prognostic Value of Admission Glycosylated Hemoglobin and Glucose in Nondiabetic Patients With ST-Segment–Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. Circulation 2011, 124, 704–711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  16. Erickson, J.R.; Pereira, L.; Wang, L.; Han, G.; Ferguson, A.; Dao, K.; Copeland, R.J.; Despa, F.; Hart, G.W.; Ripplinger, C.; et al. Diabetic hyperglycaemia activates CaMKII and arrhythmias by O-linked glycosylation. Nature 2013, 502, 372–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Zhang, L.; Xu, C.; Liu, J.; Bai, X.; Li, R.; Wang, L.; Zhou, J.; Wu, Y.; Yuan, Z. Baseline plasma fibrinogen is associated with haemoglobin A1c and 2-year major adverse cardiovascular events following percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndrome: A single-centre, prospective cohort study. Cardiovasc. Diabetol. 2019, 18, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Deedwania, P.; Kosiborod, M.; Barrett, E.; Ceriello, A.; Isley, W.; Mazzone, T.; Raskin, P. Hyperglycemia and acute coronary syndrome: A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Diabetes Committee of the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism. Anesthesiology 2008, 109, 14–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. E Capes, S.; Hunt, D.; Malmberg, K.; Gerstein, H. Stress hyperglycaemia and increased risk of death after myocardial infarction in patients with and without diabetes: A systematic overview. Lancet 2000, 355, 773–778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kosiborod, M.; Inzucchi, S.E.; Krumholz, H.M.; Xiao, L.; Jones, P.G.; Fiske, S.; Masoudi, F.A.; Marso, S.P.; Spertus, J.A. Glucometrics in patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction: Defining the optimal outcomes-based measure of risk. Circulation 2008, 117, 1018–1127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Task Force on Diabetes, Pre-Diabetes, and Cardiovascular Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC); European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD); Rydén, L.; Grant, P.J.; Anker, S.D.; Berne, C.; Cosentino, F.; Danchin, N.; Deaton, C.; Escaned, J.; et al. ESC guidelines on diabetes, pre-diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases developed in collaboration with the EASD—summary. Diab. Vasc. Dis. Res. 2014, 11, 133–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  22. Ma, P.; Han, L.; Lv, Z.; Chen, W.; Hu, H.; Tu, J.; Zhou, X.; Liu, S.-M. In-hospital free fatty acids levels predict the severity of myocardial ischemia of acute coronary syndrome. BMC Cardiovasc. Disord. 2016, 16, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Verges, B.; Patois-Vergès, B.; Iliou, M.-C.; Simoneau-Robin, I.; Bertrand, J.-H.; Feige, J.-M.; Douard, H.; Catargi, B.; Fischbach, M.; DARE Study Group. Influence of glycemic control on gain in VO2 peak, in patients with type 2 diabetes enrolled in cardiac rehabilitation after an acute coronary syndrome. The prospective DARE study. BMC Cardiovasc. Disord. 2015, 15, 64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Paneni, F.; Lüscher, T.F. Cardiovascular Protection in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: A Review of Clinical Trial Results Across Drug Classes. Am. J. Cardiol. 2017, 120, S17–S27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. De Caterina, R.; Madonna, R.; Sourij, H.; Wascher, T. Glycaemic control in acute coronary syndromes: Prognostic value and therapeutic options. Eur. Heart J. 2010, 31, 1557–1564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. American Diabetes Association. 2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020. Diabetes Care 2020, 43 (Suppl. S1), S14–S31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Bromage, D.; Yellon, D.M. The pleiotropic effects of metformin: Time for prospective studies. Cardiovasc. Diabetol. 2015, 14, 109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Rena, G.; Hardie, D.G.; Pearson, E.R. The mechanisms of action of metformin. Diabetologia 2017, 60, 1577–1585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Jong, C.-B.; Chen, K.-Y.; Hsieh, M.-Y.; Su, F.-Y.; Wu, C.-C.; Voon, W.-C.; Hsieh, I.-C.; Shyu, K.-G.; Chong, J.-T.; Lin, W.-S.; et al. Metformin was associated with lower all-cause mortality in type 2 diabetes with acute coronary syndrome: A Nationwide registry with propensity score-matched analysis. Int. J. Cardiol. 2019, 291, 152–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Jørgensen, C.; Gislason, G.; Bretler, D.; Sørensen, R.; Norgaard, M.; Hansen, M.; Schramm, T.; Abildstrom, S.; Torp-Pedersen, C.; Hansen, P. Glyburide increases risk in patients with diabetes mellitus after emergent percutaneous intervention for myocardial infarction—A nationwide study. Int. J. Cardiol. 2011, 152, 327–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Nikolaev, K.Y.; Bondareva, K.I.; Kovaleva, A.Y.; Lifshits, G.I. Estimation of metformin and other sugar reducing therapy influence on the outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome and diabetes mellitus type II. Complex Issues Cardiovasc. Dis. 2021, 10, 39–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Nikolaev, K.Y.; Bondareva, K.I.; Kovaleva, A.Y.; Lifshits, G.I. Peculiarities of hypoglycaemic therapy in acute coronary syndrome in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Patol. Krovoobrashcheniya I Kardiokhirurgiya Circ. Pathol. Card. Surgery 2021, 25, 27–37. (In Russian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Zinman, B.; Wanner, C.; Lachin, J.M.; Fitchett, D.; Bluhmki, E.; Hantel, S.; Mattheus, M.; Devins, T.; Johansen, O.E.; Woerle, H.J.; et al. Empagliflozin, Cardiovascular Outcomes, and Mortality in Type 2 Diabetes. N. Engl. J. Med. 2015, 373, 2117–2128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. McMurray, J.J.V.; DeMets, D.L.; Inzucchi, S.E.; Køber, L.; Kosiborod, M.N.; Langkilde, A.M.; Martinez, F.A.; Bengtsson, O.; Ponikowski, P.; Sabatine, M.S.; et al. The Dapagliflozin And Prevention of Adverse-outcomes in Heart Failure (DAPA-HF) trial: Baseline characteristics. Eur. J. Heart Fail. 2019, 21, 1402–1411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Kosiborod, M.N.; Jhund, P.S.; Docherty, K.; Diez, M.; Petrie, M.C.; Verma, S.; Nicolau, J.; Merkely, B.; Kitakaze, M.; DeMets, D.L.; et al. Effects of dapagliflozin on symptoms, function and quality of life in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: Results from the DAPA-HF Trial. Circulation 2019, 141, 90–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Hage, C.; Brismar, K.; Efendic, S.; Lundman, P.; Rydén, L.; Mellbin, L. Sitagliptin improves beta-cell function in patients with acute coronary syndromes and newly diagnosed glucose abnormalities-the BEGAMI study. J. Intern. Med. 2013, 273, 410–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Lim, S.; Kim, K.M.; Nauck, M.A. Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Cardiovascular Events: Class Effects versus Individual Patterns. Trends Endocrinol. Metab. 2018, 29, 238–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. García, M.I.D.O.; Merino-Torres, J.F. GLP 1 receptor agonists, glycemic variability, oxidative stress and acute coronary syndrome. Med. Hypotheses 2020, 136, 109504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Pfeffer, M.A.; Claggett, B.; Diaz, R.; Dickstein, K.; Gerstein, H.; Køber, L.V.; Lawson, F.C.; Ping, L.; Wei, X.; Lewis, E.F.; et al. Lixisenatide in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Acute Coronary Syndrome. N. Engl. J. Med. 2015, 373, 2247–2257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Drucker, D.J.; Nauck, M.A. The incretin system: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes. Lancet 2006, 368, 1696–1705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zhou, Y.; Guo, Z.; Yan, W.; Wang, W. Cardiovascular effects of sitagliptin—An anti-diabetes medicine. Clin. Exp. Pharmacol. Physiol. 2018, 45, 628–635. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  42. Kuramitsu, S.; Miyauchi, K.; Yokoi, H.; Suwa, S.; Nishizaki, Y.; Yokoyama, T.; Nojiri, S.; Iwabuchi, M.; Shirai, S.; Ando, K.; et al. Effect of sitagliptin on plaque changes in coronary artery following acute coronary syndrome in diabetic patients: The ESPECIAL-ACS study. J. Cardiol. 2017, 69, 369–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. Azoulay, L.; Suissa, S. Sulfonylureas and the Risks of Cardiovascular Events and Death: A Methodological Meta-Regression Analysis of the Observational Studies. Diabetes Care 2017, 40, 706–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Abdelmoneim, A.S.; Eurich, D.T.; Senthilselvan, A.; Qiu, W.; Simpson, S.H. Dose-response relationship between sulfonylureas and major adverse cardiovascular events in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. 2016, 25, 1186–1195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Lan, N.S.R.; Fegan, P.G.; Rankin, J.M.; Bell, D.A.; Watts, G.F.; Yeap, B.B. Implementing simple algorithms to improve glucose and lipid management in people with diabetes and acute coronary syndrome. Diabet. Med. 2019, 36, 1643–1651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Parra, V.; Verdejo, H.E.; Iglewski, M.; del Campo, A.; Troncoso, R.; Jones, D.; Zhu, Y.; Kuzmicic, J.; Pennanen, C.; Lopez-Crisosto, C.; et al. Insulin Stimulates Mitochondrial Fusion and Function in Cardiomyocytes via the Akt-mTOR-NFκB-Opa-1 Signaling Pathway. Diabetes 2014, 63, 75–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Lipton, J.A.; Can, A.; Akoudad, S.; Simoons, M.L. The role of insulin therapy and glucose normalisation in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Neth. Heart J. 2011, 19, 79–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Pinto, D.S.; Skolnick, A.H.; Kirtane, A.J.; Murphy, S.A.; Barron, H.V.; Giugliano, R.P.; Cannon, C.P.; Braunwald, E.; Gibson, C.M.; TIMI Study Group. U-shaped relationship of blood glucose with adverse outcomes among patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2005, 46, 178–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Nam, M.C.Y.; Byrne, C.D.; Kaski, J.C.; Greaves, K. Insulin in Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Narrative Review with Contemporary Perspectives. Cardiovasc. Drugs Ther. 2016, 30, 493–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Frier, B.M. Hypoglycaemia in diabetes mellitus: Epidemiology and clinical implications. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 2014, 10, 711–722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Cosmi, F.; Mariottoni, B.; Cosmi, D. II cardiopatico iperglicemico in area critica: È possibile un rischio ipoglicemico zero? [Medical intensive care unit patients with hyperglycemia: Is it possible a hypoglycemic risk close to zero?]. G. Ital. Cardiol. (Rome) 2018, 19, 460–466. (In Italian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Vergès, B.; Avignon, A.; Bonnet, F.; Catargi, B.; Cattan, S.; Cosson, E.; Ducrocq, G.; Elbaz, M.; Fredenrich, A.; Gourdy, P.; et al. Consensus statement on the care of the hyperglycaemic/diabetic patient during and in the immediate follow-up of acute coronary syndrome. Diabetes Metab. 2012, 38, 113–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Task Force on the Management of ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC); Steg, P.G.; James, S.K.; Atar, D.; Badano, L.P.; Lundqvist, C.B.; Borger, M.A.; Di Mario, C.; Dickstein, K.; Ducrocq, G.; et al. ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. Eur. Heart J. 2012, 33, 2569–2619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. A Malmberg, K.; Efendic, S.; E Rydén, L.; Multicenter Study Group. Feasibility of insulin-glucose infusion in diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction. A report from the multicenter trial: DIGAMI. Diabetes Care 1994, 17, 1007–1014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Malmberg, K.; Ryden, L.; Hamstent, A.; Herlitz, J.; Waldenstrom, A.; Wedel, H.; DIGAMI Study Group. Effects of insulin treatment on cause-specific one-year mortality and morbidity in diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction. DIGAMI Study Group. Diabetes Insulin-Glucose in Acute Myocardial Infarction. Eur. Heart J. 1996, 17, 1337–1344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  56. Nanjan, M.J.; Mohammed, M.; Kumar, B.P.; Chandrasekar, M.J.N. Thiazolidinediones as antidiabetic agents: A critical review. Bioorg. Chem. 2018, 77, 548–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Dedov, I.I.; Shestakova, M.V.; Mayorov, A.Y.; Vikulova, O.K.; Galstyan, G.R.; Kuraeva, T.L.; Peterkova, V.A.; Smirnova, O.M.; Starostina, E.G.; Surkova, E.V.; et al. Standards of specialized diabetes care. Diabetes Mellit. 2019, 22, 1–144. (In Russian) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. White, S.; Driver, B.E.; Cole, J.B. Metformin-Associated Lactic Acidosis Presenting as Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction. J. Emerg. Med. 2016, 50, 32–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Malmberg, K.; Rydén, L. Effect of Insulin–Glucose Infusion on Mortality Following Acute Myocardial Infarction in Patients with Diabetes: The Diabetes and Insulin–Glucose Infusion in Acute Myocardial Infarction Studies. Semin. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2006, 18, 326–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Dobrecky-Mery, I.; Sommer, A. Vildagliptin vs. insulin treatment alone in diabetic acute coronary syndrome patients. Coron. Artery Dis. 2021, 32, 4–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Clinical factors in choosing the main hypoglycemic drugs.
Table 1. Clinical factors in choosing the main hypoglycemic drugs.
Basic Hypoglycemic DrugsCardiovascular EffectsRenal EffectsReferences
ACDHeart FailureChronic Kidney DiseaseContraindications
MetforminPotential benefitsNeutralNeutralContraindicated at GRF < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2[6,26,27,28,29,30,31]
SGLT-2 inhibitorsBenefitBenefit:
dapagliflozin empagliflozin		Benefit:
dapagliflozin		Contraindicated at GRF < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2[32,33,34,35]
GLP1 agonistsBenefit:
liraglutide		NeutralBenefit:
liraglutide		Contraindicated at GRF < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2[36,37,38,39]
DPP-4 inhibitorsNeutralPotential risk: saxagliptin, alogliptinNeutralDose adjustment required in renal failure[40,41,42]
SulfonylureasNeutralNeutralNeutralGlibenclamide is not recommended[24,43,44]
InsulinNeutralNeutralNeutralDose adjustment required in renal failure[13,25,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55]
ThiazolidinedionesPotential benefits: pioglitazoneIncreased riskNeutralNot recommended in renal failure due to risk of fluid retention.[56]
ACD, associated cardiovascular diseases; GFR, glomerular filtration rate.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Nikolaev, K.Y.; Shevela, A.I.; Mustafina, S.V.; Rymar, O.D.; Ovsyannikova, A.K.; Zelenskaya, E.M.; Kovaleva, A.Y.; Lifshits, G.I. The Impact of Hypoglycemic Therapy on the Prognosis for Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes. J. Pers. Med. 2022, 12, 845. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12050845

AMA Style

Nikolaev KY, Shevela AI, Mustafina SV, Rymar OD, Ovsyannikova AK, Zelenskaya EM, Kovaleva AY, Lifshits GI. The Impact of Hypoglycemic Therapy on the Prognosis for Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes. Journal of Personalized Medicine. 2022; 12(5):845. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12050845

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nikolaev, K. Yu., A. I. Shevela, S. V. Mustafina, O. D. Rymar, A. K. Ovsyannikova, E. M. Zelenskaya, A. Y. Kovaleva, and G. I. Lifshits. 2022. "The Impact of Hypoglycemic Therapy on the Prognosis for Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes" Journal of Personalized Medicine 12, no. 5: 845. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12050845

APA Style

Nikolaev, K. Y., Shevela, A. I., Mustafina, S. V., Rymar, O. D., Ovsyannikova, A. K., Zelenskaya, E. M., Kovaleva, A. Y., & Lifshits, G. I. (2022). The Impact of Hypoglycemic Therapy on the Prognosis for Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 12(5), 845. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12050845

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop