Evidence Hub

Joint association of the triglyceride–glucose index and stress hyperglycemia ratio with incidence and mortality risks of new-onset atrial fibrillation during sepsis: a retrospective cohort study

Zhi-Hong Zuo, Zijing Zhou, Qiang Liu, Ruizheng Shi, Ting Wu

Cardiovascular Diabetology, 2025

4,276 participants · 33 citations

Abstract

The triglyceride–glucose (TyG) index and stress hyperglycemia ratio (SHR) have been linked to the cardiovascular risks in critical ill patients. However, little is known about the predictive power of the TyG index, SHR and their combination on the incidence and mortality risks of new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in patients with sepsis. This retrospective study included patients from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care (MIMIC)-IV database. Primary outcomes were defined as the incidence and 360-day mortality of in-hospital NOAF among patients with sepsis. Logistic model, Cox proportional hazard model, Kaplan-Meier analysis and receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) were performed to explore the association between the indices and clinical outcomes. Machine learning approach also was constructed to evaluate and compare the indices in predicting mortality risks. 4276 patients meeting the inclusion criteria were enrolled and 764 individuals developed NOAF during hospitalization. The multivariable adjusted odds ratios (95%, CI) of incidence of NOAF in patients with sepsis in the highest group versus the lowest group were 1.36 (1.10–1.69), 1.35 (1.09–1.67) and 1.58 (1.23–2.02), respectively, for the TyG index, SHR and the TyG index-SHR combination. However, the predictive powers of these indices were relatively low. Among septic patients who developed in-hospital NOAF, those in the highest TyG index group and the highest SHR group exhibited an increased risk of…

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: 4,276 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