Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

Prognostic value of admission heart rate in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Role of Type 2 diabetes mellitus

  • Zhang Han1,
  • Yang Yan-min1Email author,
  • Zhu Jun1,
  • Liu Li-sheng1,
  • Tan Hui-qiong1 and
  • Liu Yao1
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders201212:104

DOI: 10.1186/1471-2261-12-104

Received: 14 April 2012

Accepted: 4 November 2012

Published: 15 November 2012

Abstract

Background

It’s unknown whether the prognostic value of admission heart rate (HR) was different in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with or without concomitant type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Methods

Consecutive STEMI patients who presented within 12 hours of symptom onset were recruited from 274 hospitals in China. Participants were stratified into quartiles by admission HR. Baseline characteristics, current therapeutic recommenda- tions, laboratory biochemical tests, 30-day all-cause mortality and Cardiovascular Events (CVE, including all-cause death, reinfarction and stroke) were compared across admission HR quartiles.

Results

We evaluated 7294 STEMI patients, of these 820 (11.2%) had known T2DM. The admission HR quartile stratification was significantly associated with all-cause mortality and CVE regardless of T2DM status (P < 0.001 both for survival and CVE). After adjusted other risk factors, in patients without T2DM, comparing with HR <66 b.p.m., the increase of HR level was associated with worse prognosis (P < 0.05). In patients with T2DM, the hazard ratios for 30-day CVE were 1.75 (95%CI), 1.92 (95%CI), 3.00 (95%CI) in the HR of 66–76 b.p.m., 77–88 b.p.m., and >88 b.p.m., respectively. Results were similar for 30-day all-cause mortality, but the hazard ratios in Q2 (P = 0.139 and P =0.086 for survival and CVE, respectively) and Q3 groups were non-significant (P = 0.072 and P =0.033 for survival and CVE, respectively). There was a significant interaction effect of HR and T2DM on 30-day CVE mortality (P = 0.035), which was not found on all-cause mortality (P = 0.126).

Conclusion

Admission heart rate was an important risk factor of 30-day all-cause mortality and CVE in patients with STEMI with or without T2DM. However, the predictive effect was modified by T2DM.

Keywords

Heart rate ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Prognosis

Introduction

Several epidemiological and clinical studies have reported the association between heart rate (HR) and prognosis in general population and in patients with hypertension, stable coronary artery disease (CAD), heart failure (HF) [14], or acute coronary syndromes (ACS) [5, 6].

In addition, the relationship between type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and prognosis has been well demonstrated in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) [7, 8]. Cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) and higher HR may correlated with worse prognosis in diabetic patients after AMI [9, 10]. However, in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), it is unclear whether the effect of HR on prognosis will be different between patients with and without T2DM.

The purpose of our report from a large study is to evaluate the association between admission HR and 30-day all-cause mortality and cardiovascular events (CVE) in STEMI patients with or without T2DM.

Methods

Patients

From July 2001 to July 2004, 7510 consecutive patients with a clinical diagnosis of STEMI were admitted to 247 hospitals throughout China within 12 h of the onset of symptom. Data were collected and recorded in a research database. AMI was diagnosed on the basis of the European Society of Cardiology and American College of Cardiology criteria [11]. STEMI was defined as AMI with ST-segment elevation in two contiguous leads or new left-bundle branch block on an ECG obtained at the time of admission. Only patients with sinus rhythm were included in analysis. Patients who were hemodynamically unstable and hospitalized with atrial fibrillation, second or third degree heart block, ventricular tachycardia, ventricular fibrillation and cardiac arrest were excluded. According to the exclusion criteria, 99 patients were excluded. 27 patients were excluded from analysis because of incomplete information.

Data collection

At baseline, demographic characteristics and details of concomitant cardiovascular risk factors were recorded. Furthermore, a medical history was taken and fasting plasma glucose was assessed. HR was measured by a 12-lead ECG at admission. Qualifying patients received thrombolytic therapy or underwent percutanous coronary intervention (PCI) according to current therapeutic recommendations [12]. In-hospital and 30-day adverse events, including death, cardiogenic shock, HF, life-threatening arrhythmia and re-infarction were also recorded in detail.

The presence of known T2DM was recognized if the diagnosis was established according to the WHO definition [13] prior to enrollment, reported in the medical records, declared directly by the patient, or revealed by using the glucose-lowering medications, for example, metformin.

The follow-up duration was 30 days. Trained study personnel recorded all outcomes by reviewing the medical record, telephone or email contact. All-cause mortality and Cardiovascular Events (CVE, including all-cause death, reinfarction and stroke) in 30 days, were adjudicated by a central committee of clinicians.

The study was approved by the institutional Ethics committees at all participating hospitals. Informed consent was obtained from each patient.

Study outcomes and definition

The primary outcomes were death from cardiac or non-cardiac cause in 30 days. CVE comprised of all-cause mortality, reinfarction, or stroke. Definitions of outcomes were as follows:

All-cause mortality included cardiovascular death (defined as any death with a cardiovascular cause including those deaths following cardiovascular procedures or surgery or deaths due to unknown cardiovascular cause) and non-cardiovascular death (defined as deaths due to a clearly documented non-cardiovascular cause).

Reinfarction was defined as the presence of at least two of the following criteria:
  1. 1.

    New onset of characteristic ischemic chest pain/symptoms occurring at rest or with minimal exercise;

     
  2. 2.

    Elevation of enzyme levels or markers (CK, CK-MB, other cardiac enzymes or Troponin I or T) to at least twice the upper limit of the normal reference range or if enzymes were already elevated, greater than 50% of the lowest recovery enzyme level from the index infarction;

     
  3. 3.

    New ECG changes compatible with ischemia.

     

Stroke was defined as the presence of a new focal neurologic deficit consistent with a vascular origin with signs or symptoms lasting > 24 hours. Confirmation by CT scan or MRI is was obtained when available.

Statistical analysis

Continuous variables are expressed as mean ± standard deviation, and categorical variables as counts and percentages. Admission HR was firstly analyzed as a continuous variable, and then as a categorical variable (Q1:<66; Q2:66–76; Q3:77–88; Q4:>88b.p.m., beats per minute). Differences in baseline characteristics across admission HR quartiles were evaluated using the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) or Chi-square tests, according to T2DM status. The Kaplan–Meier curves were computed for cardiovascular mortality and CVE. The log- rank test was used to test the differences in the unadjusted survival curves. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated by the Cox proportional hazard regression model in patients with or without T2DM and the models were corrected for age, sex, systolic blood pressure(SBP), previous hypertension, myocardial infarction, heart failure (CHF), or stroke, ST-segment elevation leads, killip class, and intervention measures and drugs. Potential interaction (effect modification) between HR and diabetes was evaluated by adding a multiplicative interaction term (HR × diabetes) to the Cox model.

A two-sided P-value of 0.05 was considered statistically significant; all analyses were performed with SPSS 17.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).

Results

Of the 7510 patients enrolled between July 2001 and July 2004 from 274 centers across China, data from 7294 patients (97.1%) were available for analysis, and 820 (11.2%) had known T2DM (Figure 1). Overall, median admission HR was 76 (65–88) b.p.m.; 76 (64–88) b.p.m. and 80 (68–94.5) b.p.m., respectively, in patients without and with T2DM.
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2261-12-104/MediaObjects/12872_2012_Article_522_Fig1_HTML.jpg
Figure 1

Flow of study patients.

Baseline characteristics

Comparison of baseline demographic and clinical characteristics in hospital between patients with and without DM is detailed in Table 1. Patients with T2DM were older (64.7 ± 9.9 vs 62.3 ± 12.0, P < 0.001) and more of them were women (43.1% vs 27.1%, P < 0.001). More of the patients with T2DM were hypertensive (57.4% vs 38.5%, P < 0.001), had a previous stroke (16.5% vs 8.4%, P < 0.001), HF (6.3% vs 2.2%, P < 0.001) or myocardial infarction (12.2% vs 7.5%, P < 0.001) compared with patients without T2DM. T2DM was also associated with higher admission HR (82.2 ± 19.9 vs 77.2 ± 17.8, P < 0.001) and fasting serum glucose level (13.2 ± 5.5 vs 7.9 ± 3.6, P < 0.001) and more likely to be treated with insulin infusion (40.2% vs 11.5%, P < 0.05). Interestingly, participants with T2DM were more likely to receive PCI (16.9% vs 10.9%, P < 0.001), while fewer of them were treated with thrombolytic therapy (45.1% vs 53.3%, P < 0.001).
Table 1

Baseline characteristics and therapy of study participants according to diabetic state

 

Non T2DM (n = 6474)

T2DM (n = 820)

P-value

Females, %

27.1

43.1

<0.001

Age

62.3 ± 12.0

64.7 ± 9.9

<0.001

Systolic blood pressure

126.5 ± 25.1

128.1 ± 26.0

0.039

Admission heart rate

77.2 ± 17.8

82.2 ± 19.9

<0.001

Anterior ST Elevation, %

53.4

52.6

0.633

Killip class II-IV, %

17.1

24.8

<0.001

Glucose Level, mmol/L

7.9 ± 3.6

13.2 ± 5.5

<0.001

Previous medical history

Hypertension, %

38.5

57.4

<0.001

Myocardial Infarction, %

7.5

12.2

<0.001

Heart failure, %

2.2

6.3

<0.001

Stroke, %

8.4

16.5

<0.001

Therapeutic measures

PCI, %

10.9

16.9

<0.001

Thrombolytic therapy

53.3

45.1

<0.001

Insulin

11.5

40.2

<0.001

β-blockers, %

62.1

63.3

0.506

ACEI, %

71.8

73.3

0.367

Lipid-lowering drugs, %

71.1

72.6

0.377

PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; ACEI, Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors.

Characteristics were reported in Table 2 by HR quartiles and by diabetic state. It’s similar that previous history of stroke and serum glucose level were not associated with admission HR (P > 0.05) in both diabetics and non-diabetics. Meanwhile, admission HR was associated with systolic blood pressure, frequency of anterior ST Elevation, Killip class II-IV, previous history of myocardial infarction or heart failure (P < 0.05). In addition, patients with a higher admission HR were were more likely to be treated with β-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (P < 0.05) regardless of T2DM status.
Table 2

Baseline characteristics and therapy of non-diabetic patients based on quartiles of admission heart rate (Q1-Q4)

 

Patients without T2DM (n = 6474)

P-value

Patients with T2DM (n = 820)

P-value

Q1 (n = 1766)

Q2 (n = 1696)

Q3 (n = 1518)

Q4 (n = 1494)

Q1 (n = 180)

Q2 (n = 175)

Q3 (n = 193)

Q4 (n = 272)

Females, %

25.3

25.5

26.8

31.3

<0.001

37.8

43.4

42.0

47.1

0.270

Age

62.3 ± 11.2

61.2 ± 11.9

61.7 ± 12.2

63.0 ± 12.9

<0.001

64.5 ± 9.9

64.0 ± 9.5

64.8 ± 10.2

65.3 ± 9.9

0.313

Systolic blood pressure

120.0 ± 24.0

128.0 ± 24.0

130.4 ± 23.3

128.5 ± 28.0

<0.001

120.2 ± 26.8

130.2 ± 22.0

130.6 ± 25.2

130.1 ± 27.4

<0.001

Anterior ST Elevation, %

34.4

51.6

62.7

68.5

<0.001

27.2

50.3

57.5

67.3

<0.001

Killip class ≥2, %

13.5

12.6

14.0

29.7

<0.001

15.6

13.7

20.2

41.2

<0.001

Glucose, mmol/L

7.8 ± 3.5

7.7 ± 3.2

7.8 ± 3.5

8.4 ± 4.2

0.097

13.0 ± 5.3

12.6 ± 5.0

12.8 ± 4.8

14.1 ± 6.2

0.054

Previous medical history

Hypertension, %

36.4

36.9

38.7

42.6

0.001

55.6

53.1

53.9

64.0

0.062

Myocardial Infarction, %

7.3

6.5

6.8

9.6

0.005

6.7

9.7

11.9

17.7

0.003

Heart failure, %

1.0

1.2

2.0

5.0

<0.001

3.3

3.4

4.7

11.4

<0.001

Stroke, %

8.5

7.6

8.0

9.5

0.235

12.2

18.9

14.0

19.5

0.125

Therapeutic measures

PCI, %

10.4

12.4

11.7

9.2

0.024

16.7

20.0

21.8

11.8

0.023

Thrombolytic therapy, %

57.6

54.7

54.2

45.6

<0.001

53.3

45.1

40.4

43.0

0.068

Insulin, %

11.4

9.5

11.8

13.8

0.002

42.8

37.1

37.9

42.3

0.548

β-blockers, %

45.8

67.3

69.5

68.0

<0.001

42.8

73.1

66.8

68.0

<0.001

ACEI, %

68.3

74.3

73.1

71.8

<0.001

63.3

73.1

75.7

78.3

0.004

Lipid-lowering drugs, %

69.7

73.6

71.6

69.3

0.023

71.7

76.0

73.1

70.6

0.644

PCI, Percutaneous coronary intervention; ACEI, Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; P-values are given for the comparison of between the different quartiles of heart rate.

In non-T2DM group, patients with higher admission HR were older, while more of them were women and hypertensive than those with lower admission HR (P < 0.05). They were more likely to use insulin, and less likely to be treated with thrombolytic therapy (P < 0.05). However, these differences across admission HR quartiles were not apparent in patients accompanied with T2DM.

Primary and secondary outcomes

30-day outcomes were reported in Table 3 grouped by HR quartiles and by diabetic status. Patients with T2DM showed higher events rate for 30-day all-cause mortality (9.6% vs. 15.7%, P < 0.001) and CVE (11.2% vs. 18.1%, P < 0.001) compared with patients without T2DM. Events rate for 30-day all-cause mortality and CVE were higher with an increase of admission HR in patients independent of T2DM state (P < 0.001).
Table 3

30-day events stratified by heart rate quartiles (Q1-Q4) in patients with and without T2DM

Variable

Heart rate(b.p.m.)

P-value

All

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Patients without T2DM

All-cause mortality (%)

9.6

6.9

7.0

8.0

17.3

<0.001

Cardiovascular events (%)

11.2

8.8

8.8

9.6

18.5

<0.001

Patients with T2DM

All-cause mortality (%)

15.7

9.4

11.4

13.0

24.6

<0.001

Cardiovascular events (%)

18.1

10.6

12.6

16.0

27.9

<0.001

Kaplan-Meier curves for all-cause mortality and CVE were shown in Figure 2. The log-rank test reported that the unadjusted survival curves were not different among the lower three groups (P > 0.05, multiple comparison data not shown), while patients in the highest quartile of admission HR showed the highest rate of mortality and CVE (P < 0.001), regardless of T2DM.
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2261-12-104/MediaObjects/12872_2012_Article_522_Fig2_HTML.jpg
Figure 2

The Kaplan-Meier curves for survival (A and B) and survival free from CVE (C and D) by heart rate at admission in patients without (A and C) or with (B and D) T2DM (blue, Q1 ≤ 66 bpm; red, 66 < Q2 ≤ 76; yellow, 77 ≤ Q3 ≤ 88; black, Q4 > 88b.p.m.; P-value was calculated by log-rank test).

Multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to assess the prognostic value of admission HR after adjusting for age, sex, the medical history of hypertension, heart failure, myocardial infarction, stroke, Killip class, medications and procedures in-hospital (Insulin, β-blockers, ACEI, lipid-lowering drugs, and PCI). Analyses with HR as a continuous variable showed that admission HR was an independent risk factor of 30-day all-cause mortality (HR, 1.011; 95% CI, 1.008-1.015, P < 0.001) and CVE (HR, 1.010; 95% CI, 1.006-1.013, P < 0.001) in overall patients and in patients without T2DM (for all-cause mortality: HR, 1.013; 95% CI, 1.009-1.017, P < 0.001; for CVE: HR, 1.010; 95% CI, 1.006-1.014, P < 0.001). The similar predictive effect were found for 30-day CVE (P < 0.05).

Table 4 shows the details of association between quartiles of admission HR and prognosis. In patients without T2DM, comparing with HR <66 b.p.m., the HR of 66–76 b.p.m., 77–88 b.p.m., or >88 b.p.m. demonstrate Hazard Ratios of 1.44 (95% CI 1.13-1.84, P = 0.003), 1.41 (95% CI 1.10-1.80, P = 0.007), and 2.30 (95% CI 1.85-2.87, P < 0.001) for 30-day all-cause mortality; while hazard ratios for 30-day CVE were 1.39 (95% CI, 1.10-1.75, P = 0.005), 1.42 (95% CI 1.22-1.78, P = 0.003) and 2.30 (95% CI 1.87-2.83, P < 0.001). And in patients with T2DM, the hazard ratios for 30-day CVE were 1.75(95%CI), 1.92(95%CI), 3.00(95%CI) in the HR of 66–76 b.p.m., 77–88 b.p.m., and >88 b.p.m., respectively. Similar results were shown in the analyses of 30-day all-cause mortality (As is shown in Table 4), although the hazard ratios in Q2 and Q3 groups were non-significant, which seemed probably due to inefficient power with the relative small sample size in patients with T2DM.
Table 4

Adjusted hazard ratios for heart rate at admission in patients with or without T2DM

 

Admission heart rate(b.p.m.)

Q1

Q2, HR(95%CI)

P-value

Q3, HR(95%CI)

P-value

Q4, HR(95%CI)

P-value

Patients without T2DM

All-cause mortality

1.00

1.44 (1.13-1.84)

0.003

1.41 (1.10-1.80)

0.007

2.30 (1.85-2.87)

<0.001

Cardiovascular events

1.00

1.39(1.10-1.75)

0.005

1.42(1.22-1.78)

0.003

2.30(1.87-2.83)

<0.001

Patients with T2DM

All-cause mortality

1.00

1.70(0.84-3.41)

0.139

1.84(0.95-3.59)

0.072

2.56(1.38-4.73)

0.003

Cardiovascular events

1.00

1.75(0.92-3.33)

0.086

1.92(1.05-3.48)

0.033

3.00(1.76-5.14)

<0.001

However, of note, there was a significant interaction effect of HR and diabetic state on 30-day CVE mortality (P = 0.035), which indicated that increased heart rate at any level is more deleterious for CVE in diabetic than non-diabetic individuals. The potential interaction effect on all-cause mortality was not found (P = 0.126).

Discussion

Our study is the first one to assess the association between admission HR and all-mortality and CVE in STEMI patients when accompanied with or without T2DM. The main results are summarized as follows:
  1. 1.

    In STEMI patients accompanied with T2DM, admis-sion HR, 30-day all-cause mortality and rate of CVE was higher compared with those without T2DM.

     
  2. 2.

    Admission HR was an independent risk factor of prognosis in STEMI patients with or without T2DM.

     
  3. 3.

    After controlling for baseline and in-hospital therapeutic confounders, the prognostic effect of HR was different between patients with T2DM and without T2DM. In the T2DM patients, the hazard ratios in Q2 and Q3 groups were non- significant, however, it seemed probably due to inefficient power with the relative small sample size. Hazard ratios in each increased HR group were larger in individuals with than without T2DM, and there was a significant interaction effect of HR and diabetic state on 30-day CVE mortality (P = 0.035), which indicated that increased heart rate at any level is more deleterious for prognosis in diabetic than non-diabetic individuals.

     

Previous studies have shown a positive association between elevated HR and increasing risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD), all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in general people and in patients with various cardiovascular diseases [1, 3, 1416], especially AMI. Myocardial ischemia results from an imbalance between coronary blood flow supply and myocardial metabolic demand. HR and other determinants highly affect myocardial oxygen demand [17], meanwhile, HR is the major determinant of the supply of blood flow. Some studies [18] have shown that elevated HR can stimulate the arterial wall, affect local hemodynamic environment [19, 20] activate inflammation [21], disturb the imbalance between myocardial demand and supply [22], and disrupt atherosclerotic plaques [23].

Concomitant T2DM then increases the aforementioned influence further when compared with patients without T2DM, propensity to worse prognosis. First, hyperglycemia may play an important role by several pathophysiological mechanisms [2427]. Secondly, these patients have higher HR [28].

Some epidemiologic studies suggest the relationship between HR and outcome in diabetic patients. Stettler et al. [29] have reported the prognostic role of HR in patients with T2DM. In the Bremen Diabetes study, higher HR was also related to an increase of cardiovascular death [30]. However, Anselmino et al. [31] reported that in patients with stable CAD, the association between resting HR and CVE can be found in those with diabetes, but not in nondiabetic patients. It’s unknown if the difference retains in acute settings, such as STEMI. Our observation performed after separating T2DM from non-T2DM in STEMI patients, which showed that HR was an independent risk factor of prognosis (P < 0.05) regardless of T2DM.

Cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) is a common chronic complication of T2DM [32], and manifests an increase in HR and a reduction in HR variability, that confer higher morbidity and mortality to diabetic patients [33, 34]. CAN may contribute to the differences identified in the present study. High HR is not considered to diagnose CAN by itself, but it can reflect a relative imbalance in the sympathetic activity and vagal impairment [32]. It appears that T2DM and autonomic dysfunction are causally related, and a higher HR, elevated high blood pressure, and ischemia burden may be intermediate accelerators [35]. So that, T2DM may strengthen the predictive effect of HR by CAN, but we also need further study of the internal mechanism to confirm this hypothesis.

Our finding in more than 7 000 patients pointed out that HR at admission was an independent predictor of short-term adverse outcome, including cardiovascular and all-cause mortality despite the high level of treatment with beta-blockers. The results emphasized the different of prognostic effect of HR between the two kinds of population, meanwhile. However, more prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings in larger clinical registries.

Study limitation

First, the study is a subgroup analysis of an existing material, and thereby suffers from limitations and biases of such material. It is not totally equivalent to the real settings. Second, we only observed the all-cause mortality and CVE in 30 days; a longer follow-up may declare more information and elucidate the hypothesis generated in this report. Third, we don’t take blood glucose or glycolated hemoglobin level into account, which reflect the therapeutic effect of T2DM, and may effect the degree of CAN. And the HR in our database is only gained at admission rather than on-treatment or discharge value simultaneously. At last, the sample size of T2DM patients was far less than patients without T2DM (~1/8), and seemed to preclude statistical significance. A larger sample will be needed to improve the statistical power and find out the truth.

Conclusion

In conclusion, resting HR affects 30-day all-cause mortality and CVE in STEMI patients no matter with or without T2DM. The adverse effect of HR is more obvious in diabetic than non-diabetic individuals. When researching HR and cardiovascular prognosis, T2DM status must be considered. This is also useful in clinical study and treatment.

Declarations

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Emergency and Intensive Care Center, Fuwai Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College

References

  1. Saraiva F, Antonio N, Lourenco C, Goncalves F, Monteiro P, Goncalves L, Freitas M, Providencia LA: Heart rate and prognosis in acute coronary syndromes. Rev Port Cardiol. 2010, 29 (7–8): 1101-1119.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Mao Q, Huang JF, Lu X, Wu X, Chen J, Cao J, Li J, Gu D: Heart rate influence on incidence of cardiovascular disease among adults in China. Int J Epidemiol. 2010, 39 (6): 1638-1646. 10.1093/ije/dyq119.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Palatini P, Benetos A, Julius S: Impact of increased heart rate on clinical outcomes in hypertension: implications for antihypertensive drug therapy. Drugs. 2006, 66 (2): 133-144. 10.2165/00003495-200666020-00001.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bohm M, Swedberg K, Komajda M, Borer JS, Ford I, Dubost-Brama A, Lerebours G, Tavazzi L: Heart rate as a risk factor in chronic heart failure (SHIFT): the association between heart rate and outcomes in a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2010, 376 (9744): 886-894. 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61259-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bangalore S, Messerli FH, Ou FS, Tamis-Holland J, Palazzo A, Roe MT, Hong MK, Peterson ED: The association of admission heart rate and in-hospital cardiovascular events in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes: results from 135 164 patients in the CRUSADE quality improvement initiative. Eur Heart J. 2010, 31 (5): 552-560. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehp397.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Honda T, Kanazawa H, Koga H, Miyao Y, Fujimoto K: Heart rate on admission is an independent risk factor for poor cardiac function and in-hospital death after acute myocardial infarction. J Cardiol. 2010, 56 (2): 197-203. 10.1016/j.jjcc.2010.05.006.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Mak KH, Moliterno DJ, Granger CB, Miller DP, White HD, Wilcox RG, Califf RM, Topol EJ: Influence of diabetes mellitus on clinical outcome in the thrombolytic era of acute myocardial infarction, GUSTO-I Investigators. Global Utilization of Streptokinase and Tissue Plasminogen Activator for Occluded Coronary Arteries. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997, 30 (1): 171-179. 10.1016/S0735-1097(97)00118-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. van der Schaaf RJ, Henriques JP, Wiersma JJ, Koch KT, Baan J, Mulder KJ, Durrer JD, Tijssen JG, Piek JJ, de Winter RJ: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with acute ST elevation myocardial infarction with and without diabetes mellitus. Heart. 2006, 92 (1): 117-118. 10.1136/hrt.2004.059675.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Whang W, Bigger JT: Comparison of the prognostic value of RR-interval variability after acute myocardial infarction in patients with versus those without diabetes mellitus. Am J Cardiol. 2003, 92 (3): 247-251. 10.1016/S0002-9149(03)00618-0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Otter W, Kleybrink S, Doering W, Standl E, Schnell O: Hospital outcome of acute myocardial infarction in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med. 2004, 21 (2): 183-187. 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2004.01114.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Alpert JS, Thygesen K: Myocardial infarction redefined—A consensus document of The Joint European Society of Cardiology/American College of Cardiology Committee for the Redefinition of Myocardial Infarction. Eur Heart J. 2000, 21 (18): 1502-1513.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Ergelen M, Uyarel H, Cicek G, Isik T, Osmonov D, Gunaydin ZY, Bozbay M, Turer A, Gul M, Abanonu GB, et al: Which is worst in patients undergoing primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction? Hyperglycaemia? Diabetes mellitus? Or both?. Acta Cardiol. 2010, 65 (4): 415-423.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Report of WHO Consultation: Definition, Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus and its Complications. Part 1: Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus. 1999, Geneva: World Health Organization, Department of Non-communicable Disease SurveillanceGoogle Scholar
  14. Palatini P: Elevated heart rate: a "new" cardiovascular risk factor?. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2009, 52 (1): 1-5. 10.1016/j.pcad.2009.06.001.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Kristal-Boneh E, Silber H, Harari G, Froom P: The association of resting heart rate with cardiovascular, cancer and all-cause mortality. Eight year follow-up of 3527 male Israeli employees (the CORDIS Study). Eur Heart J. 2000, 21 (2): 116-124. 10.1053/euhj.1999.1741.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Fosbol EL, Seibaek M, Brendorp B, Moller DV, Thune JJ, Gislason GH, Torp-Pedersen C, Kober L: Long-term prognostic importance of resting heart rate in patients with left ventricular dysfunction in connection with either heart failure or myocardial infarction: the DIAMOND study. Int J Cardiol. 2010, 140 (3): 279-286. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2008.11.084.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Tanaka N, Nozawa T, Yasumura Y, Futaki S, Hiramori K, Suga H: Heart-rate-proportional oxygen consumption for constant cardiac work in dog heart. Jpn J Physiol. 1990, 40 (4): 503-521. 10.2170/jjphysiol.40.503.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kaplan JR, Manuck SB, Clarkson TB: The influence of heart rate on coronary artery atherosclerosis. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1987, 10 (Suppl 2): S100-S102. discussion S103PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Giannoglou GD, Chatzizisis YS, Zamboulis C, Parcharidis GE, Mikhailidis DP, Louridas GE: Elevated heart rate and atherosclerosis: an overview of the pathogenetic mechanisms. Int J Cardiol. 2008, 126 (3): 302-312. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2007.08.077.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Lang CC, Gupta S, Kalra P, Keavney B, Menown I, Morley C, Padmanabhan S: Elevated heart rate and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease: clinical evidence and pathophysiological mechanisms. Atherosclerosis. 2010, 212 (1): 1-8. 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2010.01.029.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Rogowski O, Shapira I, Shirom A, Melamed S, Toker S, Berliner S: Heart rate and microinflammation in men: a relevant atherothrombotic link. Heart. 2007, 93 (8): 940-944. 10.1136/hrt.2006.101949.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Orso F, Baldasseroni S, Maggioni AP: Heart rate in coronary syndromes and heart failure. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2009, 52 (1): 38-45. 10.1016/j.pcad.2009.05.006.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Heidland UE, Strauer BE: Left ventricular muscle mass and elevated heart rate are associated with coronary plaque disruption. Circulation. 2001, 104 (13): 1477-1482. 10.1161/hc3801.096325.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Boudina S, Abel ED: Diabetic cardiomyopathy, causes and effects. Rev Endocr Metab Disord. 2010, 11 (1): 31-39. 10.1007/s11154-010-9131-7.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  25. Creager MA, Luscher TF, Cosentino F, Beckman JA: Diabetes and vascular disease: pathophysiology, clinical consequences, and medical therapy: Part I. Circulation. 2003, 108 (12): 1527-1532. 10.1161/01.CIR.0000091257.27563.32.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Luscher TF, Creager MA, Beckman JA, Cosentino F: Diabetes and vascular disease: pathophysiology, clinical consequences, and medical therapy: Part II. Circulation. 2003, 108 (13): 1655-1661. 10.1161/01.CIR.0000089189.70578.E2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Hofsten DE, Logstrup BB, Moller JE, Pellikka PA, Egstrup K: Abnormal glucose metabolism in acute myocardial infarction: influence on left ventricular function and prognosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2009, 2 (5): 592-599. 10.1016/j.jcmg.2009.03.007.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Foo K, Sekhri N, Knight C, Deaner A, Cooper J, Ranjadayalan K, Suliman A, Timmis AD: The effect of diabetes on heart rate and other determinants of myocardial oxygen demand in acute coronary syndromes. Diabet Med. 2004, 21 (9): 1025-1031. 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2004.01413.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Stettler C, Bearth A, Allemann S, Zwahlen M, Zanchin L, Deplazes M, Christ ER, Teuscher A, Diem P: QTc interval and resting heart rate as long-term predictors of mortality in type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a 23-year follow-up. Diabetologia. 2007, 50 (1): 186-194.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Linnemann B, Janka HU: Prolonged QTc interval and elevated heart rate identify the type 2 diabetic patient at high risk for cardiovascular death. The Bremen Diabetes Study. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 2003, 111 (4): 215-222.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Anselmino M, Ohrvik J, Ryden L: Resting heart rate in patients with stable coronary artery disease and diabetes: a report from the euro heart survey on diabetes and the heart. Eur Heart J. 2010, 31 (24): 3040-3045. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehq368.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Pop-Busui R: Cardiac autonomic neuropathy in diabetes: a clinical perspective. Diabetes Care. 2010, 33 (2): 434-441. 10.2337/dc09-1294.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Maser RE, Mitchell BD, Vinik AI, Freeman R: The association between cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy and mortality in individuals with diabetes: a meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. 2003, 26 (6): 1895-1901. 10.2337/diacare.26.6.1895.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Buccelletti E, Gilardi E, Scaini E, Galiuto L, Persiani R, Biondi A, Basile F, Silveri NG: Heart rate variability and myocardial infarction: systematic literature review and metanalysis. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2009, 13 (4): 299-307.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Nagaya T, Yoshida H, Takahashi H, Kawai M: Resting heart rate and blood pressure, independent of each other, proportionally raise the risk for type-2 diabetes mellitus. Int J Epidemiol. 2010, 39 (1): 215-222. 10.1093/ije/dyp229.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Pre-publication history

    1. The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2261/12/104/prepub

Copyright

© Han et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement