↓ Skip to main content

Pharmacologic Prevention of Microvascular and Macrovascular Complications in Diabetes Mellitus

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
114 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Pharmacologic Prevention of Microvascular and Macrovascular Complications in Diabetes Mellitus
Published in
American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs, August 2012
DOI 10.2165/11594650-000000000-00000
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nikhil Tandon, Mohammed K. Ali, K. M. Venkat Narayan

Abstract

Observational epidemiologic data indicate that lower blood glucose levels, blood pressure (BP), and lipid parameters are associated with a lower incidence of micro- and macrovascular complications in people with diabetes. While no threshold for this effect is discernible in these observational studies, intervention studies do not mirror this finding. The earliest glycemia target study in type 2 diabetes mellitus, UKPDS, demonstrated unequivocal benefits of tight glucose control on microvascular complications, but needed a prolonged follow-up to demonstrate a benefit on macrovascular outcomes and mortality. Recently, three major studies, ACCORD, ADVANCE, and VADT, evaluated the impact of attaining euglycemia (ACCORD) or near-euglycemia (ADVANCE, VADT) in older patients with diabetes and high cardiovascular (CV) risk. None of these studies, either individually or on pooled analysis, demonstrated any reduction in all-cause or CV mortality, although the meta-analyses revealed 15-17% reductions in the incidence of non-fatal myocardial infarction in those exposed to tight glucose control. A higher mortality was observed in the intensive glucose control arm of ACCORD, resulting in the premature termination of the glucose-lowering component of this study. Also, the occurrence of hypoglycemic episodes (total and major) was significantly higher in the intensive glucose control arm. ADVANCE and ACCORD also had BP-lowering components. While data from ADVANCE demonstrated a benefit of routine use of a combination of perindopril and indapamide, with a decline in all-cause mortality, CV mortality, and new-onset microalbuminuria, reducing systolic BP to <120 mmHg in ACCORD did not result in any incremental benefits over a systolic BP<140 mmHg. A residual CV risk observed in people with diabetes even after low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol lowering has led to trials evaluating additional therapy with fibric acid derivatives to reduce triglyceride levels. The lipid-lowering arm of ACCORD failed to demonstrate any benefit of add-on therapy with fibric acid derivatives to LDL-lowering treatment with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) on vascular outcomes in patients with diabetes. However, data from earlier studies, and also from the subgroup analysis of ACCORD, indicate a probable benefit of adding treatment with fibric acid derivatives to individuals with persistently elevated triglyceride levels despite statin therapy. The most compelling evidence comes from studies assessing the impact of multiple risk factors - glucose, BP, and cholesterol. Studies like the Steno study unequivocally demonstrate the benefit of aggressive control of all three parameters on vascular outcomes in patients with diabetes. In conclusion, attempts to achieve euglycemia in older patients with type 2 diabetes with co-morbidities are not associated with any survival benefit, but may reduce the occurrence of non-fatal CV events. There is a significant risk of major hypoglycemia with this approach, thereby probably limiting its utility to younger patients with new-onset disease. Similarly, lowering systolic BP below 120 mmHg in high CV risk people with diabetes is associated with significant excess adverse events, limiting the utility of such an intervention. However, a clear benefit, which is also cost effective, is observed with strategies for multiple risk-factor control, which should be universally adopted in clinical practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 114 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Portugal 1 <1%
Unknown 112 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 21%
Researcher 15 13%
Other 14 12%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Student > Postgraduate 10 9%
Other 23 20%
Unknown 18 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 45%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 6 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 4%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 16 14%
Unknown 26 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 26 November 2015.
All research outputs
#6,237,961
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs
#134
of 467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,817
of 187,099 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs
#34
of 127 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 187,099 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 127 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.