切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华危重症医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2024, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (02) : 124 -129. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-6880.2024.02.006

论著

应激性高血糖指数对经皮冠状动脉介入术后急性心肌梗死患者发生主要不良心脑血管事件的预测价值
王友芳1, 李兴超2, 刘清敏1, 刘德彬1, 刘松伍1, 郭冬冬3, 车峰远3,()   
  1. 1. 276002 山东临沂,临沂市人民医院重症医学科
    2. 276002 山东临沂,临沂市人民医院科研科
    3. 276002 山东临沂,临沂市人民医院神经内科
  • 收稿日期:2023-10-19 出版日期:2024-04-30
  • 通信作者: 车峰远
  • 基金资助:
    山东省医药卫生科技项目(202303010555); 临沂市重点研发计划(2023YX0040)

Predictive effect of stress hyperglycemia ratio on major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events in patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention

Youfang Wang1, Xingchao Li2, Qingmin Liu1, Debin Liu1, Songwu Liu1, Dongdong Guo3, Fengyuan Che3,()   

  1. 1. Department of Intensive Care Unit, Linyi People's Hospital, Linyi 276002, China
    2. Department of Scientific Research, Linyi People's Hospital, Linyi 276002, China
    3. Department of Internal Medicine-Neurology, Linyi People's Hospital, Linyi 276002, China
  • Received:2023-10-19 Published:2024-04-30
  • Corresponding author: Fengyuan Che
引用本文:

王友芳, 李兴超, 刘清敏, 刘德彬, 刘松伍, 郭冬冬, 车峰远. 应激性高血糖指数对经皮冠状动脉介入术后急性心肌梗死患者发生主要不良心脑血管事件的预测价值[J]. 中华危重症医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(02): 124-129.

Youfang Wang, Xingchao Li, Qingmin Liu, Debin Liu, Songwu Liu, Dongdong Guo, Fengyuan Che. Predictive effect of stress hyperglycemia ratio on major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events in patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention[J]. Chinese Journal of Critical Care Medicine(Electronic Edition), 2024, 17(02): 124-129.

目的

分析应激性高血糖指数(SHR)对经皮冠状动脉介入(PCI)术后急性心肌梗死(AMI)患者发生主要不良心脑血管事件(MACCE)的预测价值。

方法

选取2017年1月至2021年12月期间在临沂市人民医院进行PCI治疗的271例AMI患者,根据SHR第三个四分位数(1.59)将其分为高SHR组(SHR ≥ 1.59,115例)和低SHR组(SHR < 1.59,156例),比较两组患者的临床资料及预后情况。采用单因素及多因素logistic回归分析经PCI治疗后AMI患者发生MACCE的影响因素,受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线评估SHR对AMI患者发生MACCE的预测价值。

结果

高SHR组患者的血糖、肾小球滤过率、ST段抬高型心肌梗死(STEMI)占比均显著高于低SHR组,血管重建时间和低密度脂蛋白均显著低于低SHR组(P均< 0.05)。PCI治疗后第1个月、第6个月、第12个月,高SHR组MACCE发生率均显著高于低SHR组(χ2 = 8.651、11.208、15.235,P均< 0.001)。Logistic回归分析结果显示,SHR[比值比(OR)= 2.231,95%置信区间(CI)(1.656,4.078),P = 0.008]、血糖[OR = 1.169,95%CI(1.114,1.290),P = 0.002]、肾小球滤过率[OR = 1.767,95%CI(1.522,2.616),P = 0.041]、血管重建时间[OR = 2.688,95%CI(1.704,4.145),P = 0.006]、STEMI[OR = 2.113,95%CI(1.269,3.381),P = 0.012]均是影响MACCE发生的危险因素。SHR对AMI患者发生MACCE的预测效果最好,评估临界值为1.92,敏感度为0.782,特异度为0.830,曲线下面积为0.865,95%CI为0.772 ~ 0.962(P = 0.003)。

结论

SHR是评价AMI患者PCI术后MACCE发生风险的有效预测指标。

Objective

To analyze the predictive value of stress hyperglycemia ratio (SHR) for major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Methods

A total of 271 AMI patients who underwent PCI in Linyi People's Hospital from January 2017 to December 2021 were selected. According to the third quartile of SHR (1.59), they were divided into a high SHR group (SHR ≥ 1.59, 115 cases) and a low SHR group (SHR < 1.59, 156 cases), and their clinical data and outcomes were compared between the two groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression methods were used to analyze the influencing factors of MACCE in AMI patients after PCI, and receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves were used to evaluate the predictive value of SHR for MACCE.

Results

Compared with the low SHR group, patients in the high SHR group showed a significant increase in blood glucose, glomerular filtration rate and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and a significant decrease in vascular reconstruction time and low densith lipoprotein (all P < 0.05). The incidence of MACCE in the high SHR group was significantly increased at the 1st, 6th and 12th months after PCI than that in the low SHR group (χ2 = 8.651, 11.208, 15.235; all P < 0.001). The logistic regression analysis showed that the SHR [odds ratio (OR) = 2.231, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.656, 4.078), P = 0.008], blood glucose [OR = 1.169, 95%CI (1.114, 1.290), P = 0.002], glomerular filtration rate [OR = 1.767, 95%CI (1.522, 2.616), P = 0.041], vascular reconstruction time [OR = 2.688, 95%CI (1.704, 4.145), P = 0.006] and STEMI [OR = 2.113, 95%CI (1.269, 3.381), P = 0.012] were risk factors for the occurrence of MACCE in AMI patients. The ROC curve showed that the critical value for evaluating the occurrence of MACCE in AMI patients using SHR was 1.92, with the sensitivity of 0.782, specificity of 0.830, area under the curve of 0.865 and 95%CI of 0.772-0.962 (P = 0.003).

Conclusion

SHR is an effective predictive indicator for the risk of MACCE in AMI patients undergoing PCI.

表1 两组AMI患者一般资料比较( ± s
表2 影响PCI术后AMI患者发生MACCE相关危险因素的logistic回归分析结果
表3 影响PCI术后AMI患者发生MACCE相关预测指标ROC曲线分析
1
Saito Y, Kobayashi Y. Update on antithrombotic therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention[J]. Intern Med, 2020, 59 (3): 311-321.
2
Song Y, Cui K, Yang M, et al. High triglyceride-glucose index and stress hyperglycemia ratio as predictors of adverse cardiac events in patients with coronary chronic total occlusion: a large-scale prospective cohort study[J]. Cardiovasc Diabetol, 2023, 22 (1): 180.
3
Gao S, Huang S, Lin X, et al. Prognostic implications of stress hyperglycemia ratio in patients with myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary arteries[J]. Ann Med, 2023, 55 (1): 990-999.
4
Xia Z, Gu T, Zhao Z, et al. The stress hyperglycemia ratio, a novel index of relative hyperglycemia, predicts short-term mortality in critically ill patients after esophagectomy[J]. J Gastrointest Oncol, 2022, 13 (1): 56-66.
5
Merlino G, Smeralda C, Gigli GL, et al. Stress hyperglycemia is predictive of worse outcome in patients with acute ischemic stroke undergoing intravenous thrombolysis[J]. J Thromb Thrombolysis, 2021, 51 (3): 789-797.
6
Wang Z, Fan L. Does stress hyperglycemia in diabetic and non-diabetic acute ischemic stroke patients predict unfavorable outcomes following endovascular treatment?[J]. Neurol Sci, 2023, 44 (5): 1695-1702.
7
Sigirci S, Yildiz SS, Keskin K, et al. The predictive value of stress hyperglycemia on thrombus burden in nondiabetic patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction[J]. Blood Coagul Fibrinolysis, 2019, 30 (6): 270-276.
8
张文娟,陈露. 2000-2020年中国人口老龄化及其区域不平衡性的演变[J].人口与社会202339(4):1-16.
9
夏智丽,高程洁,高亚洁,等.应激性血糖升高比值对急性心肌梗死患者预后的评估价值[J].上海交通大学学报(医学版)201939(3):309-315.
10
罗云,李政,张佳慧,等.脑梗死患者急性应激性血糖升高与糖化血红蛋白的相关性[J].中华老年医学杂志202039(2):155-158.
11
Wang YX, Deng YH, Tan YL, et al. Predictive value of stress-induced hyperglycemia on 28 d risk of all-cause death in intensive care patients[J]. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban, 2023, 55 (3): 442-449.
12
Li S, Wang Y, Wang W, et al. Stress hyperglycemia is predictive of clinical outcomes in patients with spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage[J]. BMC Neurol, 2022, 22 (1): 236.
13
吴伏鹏,朱晓光,李梅芳,等.应激性血糖升高比值对急性心力衰竭患者预后的评估价值[J].中华急诊医学杂志202130(3):318-322.
14
马瑞聪,丁彦春.急性心肌梗死后应激性高血糖的研究进展[J].心血管病学进展202344(3):198-202.
15
贺娜,李敏娴,张旗,等.应激性高血糖对急性冠脉综合征患者心率变异性及预后的影响[J].河北医药202143(13):1963-1967.
16
翟文亮,邢绣荣,何婧瑜,等.应激性高血糖比率对老年急性心力衰竭患者短期预后的判断价值[J].中国医刊202358(10):1146-1149.
17
Luo J, Xu S, Li H, et al. Prognostic impact of stress hyperglycemia ratio in acute myocardial infarction patients with and without diabetes mellitus[J]. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis, 2022, 32 (10): 2356-2366.
18
Gao S, Liu Q, Chen H, et al. Predictive value of stress hyperglycemia ratio for the occurrence of acute kidney injury in acute myocardial infarction patients with diabetes[J]. BMC Cardiovasc Disord, 2021, 21 (1): 157.
19
Gunst J, Verbruggen SC. Insulin resistance in critical illness: consequences for nutrition therapy and glucose management[J]. Curr Opin Crit Care, 2023, 29 (4): 286-292.
20
Demarchi A, Cornara S, Somaschini A, et al. Has hyperglycemia a different prognostic role in STEMI patients with or without diabetes?[J]. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis, 2021, 31 (2): 528-531.
21
Perez de la Hoz RA, Swieszkowski SP, Cintora FM, et al. Neuroendocrine system regulatory mechanisms: acute coronary syndrome and stress hyperglycaemia[J]. Eur Cardiol, 2018, 13 (1): 29-34.
[1] 薛艳玲, 马小静, 谢姝瑞, 何俊, 夏娟, 何亚峰. 左心声学造影在急性心肌梗死合并室间隔穿孔中的应用价值[J]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2023, 20(10): 1036-1039.
[2] 吴俊嶺, 孟科, 刘江涛, 孙刚. 基于HVPG分层的门脉高压内镜治疗中远期疗效研究[J]. 中华腔镜外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 17(02): 100-105.
[3] 邢颖, 程石. 巨脾外科治疗现状与介入治疗序贯手术策略[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(03): 253-258.
[4] 魏小勇. 原发性肝癌转化治疗焦点问题探讨[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 602-607.
[5] 高振轩, 谢晨, 曹绍东, 甘中伟, 周倍, 罗朝川, 王子齐, 葛煜彤, 张伟光. 高分辨率核磁共振在颅颈大动脉狭窄介入治疗中的临床应用进展[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(02): 112-119.
[6] 潘晓帆, 徐勤义, 陆瑨, 王丹, 刘路路, 董万利. 颅内动脉瘤破裂介入术后并发脑疝的风险因素分析[J]. 中华脑科疾病与康复杂志(电子版), 2024, 14(01): 37-44.
[7] 刘亮, 肖浩, 崔晓磊, 吕宝谱, 张睿, 郑拓康, 孟庆冰, 姚冬奇, 田英平, 高恒波. 急性心肌梗死合并心源性休克患者预后因素分析97例[J]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 183-189.
[8] 林永俭, 谢雪花, 郝莉茹, 刘丽, 马英东. 优化急诊绿色通道对急性心肌梗死介入治疗患者救治时间的影响[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2024, 12(02): 185-189.
[9] 刘一人, 崔世军, 佟铸, 郭建明, 杨盛家, 谷涌泉, 郭连瑞. 急性肠系膜上动脉栓塞的介入治疗[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2024, 12(02): 131-136.
[10] 徐啸阳, 张帅, 仲斌演, 沈健, 朱晓黎. 血管腔内介入治疗肾动脉瘤的临床疗效分析[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2024, 12(02): 137-143.
[11] 陈涛, 石红建, 周良, 甘振. 介入治疗胃胆胰术后迟发性出血的临床疗效与安全性[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2024, 12(01): 39-44.
[12] 崔皓然, 顾俊鹏, 任伟新. 基于经导管动脉化疗栓塞联合治疗肝癌伴门静脉癌栓的进展[J]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2024, 12(01): 64-69.
[13] 郭方明, 赵明俐, 颜凡辉, 刘萌萌, 王阳, 赵英杰, 刘远航, 张艳芬, 詹景冬. 光学相干断层成像在急性心肌梗死冠状动脉分层斑块病变中的应用[J]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2024, 12(02): 73-79.
[14] 田欢, 吴艳凯, 宋波, 魏榕辰, 张艳, 李月戈, 武柏林. 基于心脏磁共振多模态特征评估急性心肌梗死患者预后[J]. 中华心脏与心律电子杂志, 2024, 12(01): 17-25.
[15] 段丽娟, 蒋艳, 樊朝凤, 曹华. 颅内动脉瘤介入治疗术后不留置导尿管的效果及安全性[J]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(02): 104-109.
阅读次数
全文


摘要