| Title |
Diabetes mellitus and its impact on long-term outcomes after coronary artery bypass graft surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Acta Diabetologica, September 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00592-010-0223-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. A. M. Wit, M. de Mulder, E. K. Jansen, V. A. W. M. Umans |
| Abstract |
Diabetes mellitus (DM) is an important risk factor for accelerated atherosclerosis and increases cardiovascular disease. Several studies found a higher mortality rate in postoperative diabetic patients than in non-diabetic patients. However, other studies found conflicting evidence on bypass graft dysfunction in patients with diabetes mellitus. We therefore investigated the influence of diabetes mellitus on the long-term outcome after coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). In this prospective study, 936 consecutive CABG patients were included. These patients were divided into three groups: patients without diabetes mellitus, patients with diabetes mellitus using oral drugs (non-insulin-treated DM) and patients with diabetes mellitus using insulin (insulin-treated DM). The three groups were compared for mortality and (angiographic) bypass graft dysfunction. Of the 936 included patients, 720 (76.8%) patients were non-diabetics, 138 (14.7%) were non-insulin-treated DM, and 78 (8.3%) patients were insulin-treated DM. Follow-up was achieved in all patients, at a mean of 33 months. Mortality was significantly higher in patients with insulin-treated DM, compared with non-insulin-treated DM or non-diabetic patients (P = 0.003). Fourteen (1.5%) patients suffered a myocardial infarction after CABG. A coronary angiography was performed in 77 (8.2%) patients during follow-up, proven bypass graft dysfunction was found in 41 (53.2%) patients. There was no significant difference in bypass graft dysfunction between the three groups. Diabetes mellitus has a significant impact on long-term follow-up after coronary surgery. Particularly insulin dependency is related to an increased mortality. However, diabetes has no influence on angiographically proven bypass graft dysfunction. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 35 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 25% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 47% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 2 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 10 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 July 2012.
All research outputs
#7,454,951
of 22,790,780 outputs
Outputs from Acta Diabetologica
#244
of 891 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,675
of 96,893 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Diabetologica
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,790,780 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 891 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 96,893 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.