Abstract
Background
This study aimed to investigate the correlation between glucose fluctuation from self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) and the major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in diabetic patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) during a 6-month follow-up period using the WeChat application.
Methods
From November 2016 to June 2017, 262 patients with ACS were discharged in a stable condition and completed a 6-month follow-up period. SMBG was recorded using the WeChat application. The patients were divided to a high glucose fluctuation group (H group; n=92) and a low glucose fluctuation group (L group; n=170). The 6-month incidence of MACE, lost-to-follow-up rate and satisfaction rate were measured through the WeChat follow-up.
Results
MACE occurred in 17.4% of patients in the H group and in 8.2% of patients in the L group (p=0.04). Multivariable analysis suggested that high glucose fluctuation conferred an 87% risk increment of MACE in the 6-month follow-up period (odds ratio: 2.1, 95% confidence interval 1.95–4.85; p=0.03). The lost-to-follow-up rate was lower and the satisfaction rate was higher in the patients using the WeChat application during follow-up than those of the regular outpatient follow-up during the same period (p<0.05).
Conclusions
The trial demonstrates that higher glucose fluctuation from SMBG after discharge was correlated with a higher incidence of MACE in diabetic patients with ACS. WeChat follow-up might have the potential to promote a good physician-patient relationship.
Author contributions: All the authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this submitted manuscript and approved submission.
Research funding: This research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81770344) and the China Young and Middle-aged Clinical Research – VG fund (No. 2017-CCA-VG-043).
Employment or leadership: None declared.
Honorarium: None declared.
Competing interests: The funding organization(s) played no role in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; or in the decision to submit the report for publication.
References
1. Valensi P, Husemoen L, Weatherall J, Monnier L. Association of postprandial and fasting plasma glucose with HbA1c across the spectrum of glycaemic impairment in type 2 diabetes. Int J Clin Pract 2017;71:e13041.10.1111/ijcp.13041Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
2. Kuroda M, Shinke T, Sakaguchi K, Otake H, Takaya T, Hirota Y, et al. Effect of daily glucose fluctuation on coronary plaque vulnerability in patients pre-treated with lipid-lowering therapy: a prospective observational study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2015;8:800.10.1016/j.jcin.2014.11.025Search in Google Scholar PubMed
3. Kuroda M, Shinke T, Sakaguchi K, Otake H, Takaya T, Hirota Y, et al. Association between daily glucose fluctuation and coronary plaque properties in patients receiving adequate lipid-lowering therapy assessed by continuous glucose monitoring and optical coherence tomography. Cardiovasc Diabetol 2015;14:78.10.1186/s12933-015-0236-xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
4. Xia J, Xu J, Li B, Liu Z, Hao H, Yin C, et al. Association between glycemic variability and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in patients with acute coronary syndrome during 30-day follow-up. Clin Chim Acta 2017;466:162–6.10.1016/j.cca.2017.01.022Search in Google Scholar PubMed
5. Charleer S, Mathieu C, Nobels F, De Block C, Radermecker RP, Hermans MP, et al. Effect of continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control, acute admissions and quality of life: a real-world study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2018;103:1224–32.10.1210/jc.2017-02498Search in Google Scholar PubMed
6. Blasco A, Carmona M, Fernández-Lozano I, Salvador CH, Pascual M, Sagredo PG, et al. Evaluation of a telemedicine service for the secondary prevention of coronary artery disease. J Cardiopulm Rehabil 2012;32:25.10.1097/HCR.0b013e3182343aa7Search in Google Scholar PubMed
7. Eagle KA, Lim MJ, Dabbous OH, Pieper KS, Goldberg RJ, Van de Werf F, et al. A validated prediction model for all forms of acute coronary syndrome: estimating the risk of 6-month postdischarge death in an international registry. J Am Med Assoc 2004;291:2727–33.10.1001/jama.291.22.2727Search in Google Scholar PubMed
8. Tang X, Li S, Wang Y, Wang M, Yin Q, Mu P, et al. Glycemic variability evaluated by continuous glucose monitoring system is associated with the 10-y cardiovascular risk of diabetic patients with well-controlled HbA1c. Clin Chim Acta 2016;461:146–50.10.1016/j.cca.2016.08.004Search in Google Scholar PubMed
9. Tokue M, Iijima R, Imamura T, Niikura H, Hayashi F, Yazaki Y, et al. Impact of glycemic variability in patients with ST-elevated myocardial infarction. Int J Cardiol 2015;187:660–2.10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.03.365Search in Google Scholar PubMed
10. Tylee TS, Trence DL. Glycemic variability: looking beyond the A1C. Diabetes Spectr 2012;25:149–53.10.2337/diaspect.25.3.149Search in Google Scholar
11. Nalysnyk L, Hernandez-Medina M, Krishnarajah G. Glycaemic variability and complications in patients with diabetes mellitus: evidence from a systematic review of the literature. Diabetes Obes Metab 2010;12:288–98.10.1111/j.1463-1326.2009.01160.xSearch in Google Scholar PubMed
12. Shimabukuro M, Tanaka A, Sata M, Dai K, Shibata Y, Inoue Y, et al. α-Glucosidase inhibitor miglitol attenuates glucose fluctuation, heart rate variability and sympathetic activity in patients with type 2 diabetes and acute coronary syndrome: a multicenter randomized controlled (MACS) study. Cardiovasc Diabetol 2017;16:86.10.1186/s12933-017-0571-1Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
13. Danne T, Nimri R, Battelino T, Bergenstal RM, Close KL, DeVries JH, et al. International consensus on use of continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care 2017;40:1631.10.2337/dc17-1600Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
14. Klonoff DC, Ahn D, Drincic A. Continuous glucose monitoring: a review of the technology and clinical use. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2017;133:178.10.1016/j.diabres.2017.08.005Search in Google Scholar PubMed
15. Jung HS. Clinical implications of glucose variability: chronic complications of diabetes. Endocrinol Metab 2015;30:167–74.10.3803/EnM.2015.30.2.167Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
16. Service FJ. Glucose variability. Diabetes 2013;62:1398–404.10.2337/db12-1396Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
17. Devries JH. Glucose variability: where it is important and how to measure it. Diabetes 2013;62:1405.10.2337/db12-1610Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
18. Carlson AL, Mullen DM, Bergenstal RM. Clinical use of continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 2017;19 Suppl 2:S4–11.10.1089/dia.2017.0024Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
19. Mikolasek M, Berg J, Witt CM, Barth J. Effectiveness of mindfulness- and relaxation-based eHealth interventions for patients with medical conditions: a systematic review and synthesis. Int J Behav Med 2017;25:1–16.10.1007/s12529-017-9679-7Search in Google Scholar PubMed
20. Kebede M, Christianson L, Khan Z, Heise TL, Pischke CR. Effectiveness of behavioral change techniques employed in eHealth interventions designed to improve glycemic control in persons with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol. Syst Rev 2017;6:211.10.1186/s13643-017-0609-1Search in Google Scholar PubMed PubMed Central
©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
