Evidence Hub

Glycemic control and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with diabetes and coronary artery disease according to triglyceride-glucose index: a large-scale cohort study

Zhang-Yu Lin, Ji-Ning He, S. Yuan, Chen-Xi Song, X. Bian, Min Yang, K. Dou

Cardiovascular Diabetology, 2024

9,996 participants · 29 citations

Abstract

The role of triglyceride-glucose (TyG) index, an insulin resistance indicator, in glycemic management for diabetic patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) was still unknown. Therefore, we aimed to explore the association between glycemic control and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in patients with diabetes and CAD according to different TyG index levels. A total of 9996 diabetic patients with angiograph-proven CAD were consecutively recruited from 2017 to 2018 at Fuwai Hospital. Patients were assigned into 3 groups according to TyG index tertiles (T) (T1: <8.895; T2: 8.895-9.400; T3: ≥9.400). According to American Diabetes Association guidelines, controlled glycemia was defined as targeting glycosylated hemoglobin Alc (HbA1c) < 7%. The primary endpoint was CV events including CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke. During a median 3-year follow-up, 381 (3.8%) CV events occurred. Overall, high TyG index (T3) was associated with increased risk of CV events (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02–1.94) compared with the lowest TyG index (T1) after multivariable adjustment. Upon stratification by the TyG index, in fully adjusted models, controlled glycemia was associated with reduced risk of CV events in the high TyG index (T3) subgroup (HR: 0.64; 95%CI: 0.42–0.96) but not in the low (T1; HR: 0.79; 95%CI: 0.53–1.16) and moderate (T2; HR: 0.84; 95%CI: 0.56–1.25) TyG index subgroups. Controlled glycemia was associated with improved CV…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 9,996 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free