Open Access
Open Peer Review

This article has Open Peer Review reports available.

How does Open Peer Review work?

C-Reactive protein reactions to glucose-insulin-potassium infusion and relations to infarct size in patients with acute coronary syndromes

  • Hadeel Alkofide1, 2,
  • Gordon S. Huggins3,
  • Joni R. Beshansky4, 5,
  • Robin Ruthazer4, 6,
  • Inga Peter7,
  • Madhab Ray1,
  • Jayanta T. Mukherjee1, 6 and
  • Harry P. Selker4, 6Email author
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders201515:163

https://doi.org/10.1186/s12872-015-0153-7

Received: 16 January 2015

Accepted: 19 November 2015

Published: 3 December 2015

Abstract

Background

Some benefits of glucose-insulin-potassium (GIK) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) may be from an anti-inflammatory effect. The primary aim of this study was to assess the impact of GIK administration early in the course of ACS on inflammatory marker C-reactive protein (CRP) levels. A secondary aim was to investigate the association between CRP and 30-day infarct size.

Methods and Results

Retrospective analysis of participants with ACS randomly assigned to GIK or placebo for at least 8 h in the IMMEDIATE Trial biological mechanism cohort (n = 143). High sensitivity CRP (hs-CRP) was measured at emergency department presentation, and 6 and 12 h into infusion. Logarithmically transformed hs-CRP values at 12-hours were lower with GIK vs. placebo (mean =0.65 mg/L in GIK, 0.84 mg/L in placebo), with a marginal trend toward significance (P = 0.053). Furthermore, using mixed models of hs-CRP, time, and study group, there was a significant increase in hs-CRP levels over time, but the rate of change did not differ between treatment arms (P = 0.3). Multivariable analysis showed that an elevation in hs-CRP, measured at 12 h, was an independent predictor of 30-day infarct size (β coefficient, 6.80; P = 0.04) using sestamibi SPECT imaging.

Conclusions

The results of this study show no significant effect of GIK on hs-CRP. In addition our results show that in patients with ACS, hs-CRP measured as early as 12 h can predict 30-day infarct size.

Keywords

Acute coronary syndromes Glucose-insulin-potassium (GIK) Inflammation C-reactive protein Metabolic therapy

Backgrounds

Glucose -insulin-potassium (GIK) infusion as metabolic therapy can reduce damage to myocardial cells in the setting of ischemia or infarction [14]. Since its introduction in the early 1960s [5], GIK treatment has been assessed in both animal models and human studies. However, the role of GIK in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) remains controversial. While several clinical trials have shown no benefit of GIK treatment in patients with acute MI [610], other studies have reported benefit [1115]. Most recently, the IMMEDIATE (Immediate Myocardial Metabolic Enhancement During Initial Assessment and Treatment in Emergency care) Trial failed to show significant differences in the outcome of progression to MI among patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACS); but it did show that GIK was associated with lower rates of the composite outcome of cardiac arrest and/or in-hospital mortality, and with smaller infarct size [15]. The IMMEDIATE Trial is distinguished from other trials by the early administration of GIK prior to arrival at the hospital [15]. In previous studies, GIK administration was delayed until hospital admission [610], with a median time of 6 h from symptom onset to GIK initiation in one study [9].

While the mechanisms underlying GIK’s effects in patients with ACS are unknown, several pathways have been suggested, including a metabolic pathway by promoting of glycolysis, and reducing circulating free fatty acid (FFA) levels, and through anti-inflammatory effects [1618]. Inflammation contributes to myocardial damage in ischemia, infarction, and reperfusion [19]. The acute phase reactant C-reactive protein (CRP) is released in response to inflammation in chronic coronary artery disease and in acute MI [19]. High CRP levels after acute MI predict infarct expansion and plaque rupture [2022]. Whereas a reduction in the rise of CRP levels has been shown to indicate the efficacy of thrombolytic therapy and a patent infarct-related coronary artery [23, 24]. Continued elevations in CRP portend increased risk of mortality, even in the presence of currently available therapies for ACS [25].

In the setting of ACS, GIK has been demonstrated to reduce serum markers of inflammation, including CRP in one study [18] but not in others [26, 27]. Here, in the largest study to date of very early administration of GIK for ACS, the IMMEDIATE Trial, we tested the hypothesis that GIK was associated with smaller CRP elevations compared to those treated with placebo. Related to this, we further hypothesized that the changes in CRP levels following presentation with an ACS correlate with 30-day infarct size.

Methods

Study sample

This study analyzed data collected from participants enrolled in the IMMEDIATE Trial, the methodology of which has been published elsewhere [15]. In brief, it was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical effectiveness trial of GIK, from December 2006 through July 2011, in which paramedics, aided by electrocardiograph (ECG)-based decision support, randomized and enrolled 871 participates aged ≥30 years with high probability of ACS [15]. Participants were given either the GIK solution (30 % glucose, 50 U/L of regular insulin, and 80 mEq of KCl/L) intravenously at 1.5 mL/kg/h for 12 h, or an identical-appearing placebo as 5 % glucose solution. In the study, the median time from symptom onset to initiation of infusion was 90 min [15]. This investigation was based on the IMMEDIATE Trial biological mechanism cohort (“biocohort”), which comprised of participants who consented to participate in this biocohort, confirmed as having ACS, and treated for at least 8 h with study drug. Confirmed ACS (acute MI or angina pectoris) was determined by site investigator review and then independently adjudicated by the study clinical events committee who were blinded to study group, glucose, and potassium results. Enrolment in the biocohort began after the trial was started and only included 6 out of 13 study centers. The study protocol and analyses were approved by the Tufts Institutional Review Board (IRB) and by the IRBs responsible for each of the IMMEDIATAE Trial study sites.

Data collection

During the 12-hour infusion of study drug, glucose, insulin, FFA, and high sensitivity CRP (hs-CRP) levels were tested at three times: 1) the initial measurement, which was drawn as soon as feasible after hospital arrival; 2) 6 h after start of study drug; and 3) 12 h after start of study drug, or upon discontinuation of the infusion. Hemoglobin A1C was measured on admission and at 30 days, and infarct size was measured at 30 days by sestamibi SPECT imaging. The Trial’s core laboratory interpreted the nuclear studies, and the core laboratory of Tufts Clinical and Translational Science Institute performed the hs-CRP measurements. Other covariates measured in the biocohort include demographic data, vital signs, medical history, and medications used at home, in the hospital, or upon discharge.

Data analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using R, version 2.15.2. Descriptive statistics were used to describe baseline characteristics. All tests were two-sided, using alpha <0.05 to determine statistical significance. Serum hs-CRP levels ranged widely and their distribution was highly skewed to lower levels; therefore hs-CRP concentrations were logarithmically (base 10) transformed in all further analyses. Linear regression models were used to assess the relationship between initial hs-CRP measurements and baseline characteristics; variables significantly associated with initial hs-CRP levels were adjusted-for in the analysis. The independent sample t-test was used to detect unadjusted differences in cross-sectional hs-CRP levels between GIK and placebo. In addition, using independent sample t-test, the differences between the initial and 12-hour hs-CRP measurements (delta hs-CRP) were used to assess differences by treatment arm. A mixed model was used to detect the differential effect of treatment on the rate of change in the initial, 6-, and 12-hour hs-CRP levels, adjusting for baseline and clinical characteristics associated with initial hs-CRP measurement, and accounting for repeated measures on each participant at the different time points. We also adjusted for time from symptom onset to reperfusion therapy. The linear mixed model uses a random intercept for each subject, and for within-subject correlation. The model included terms for time, from the initiation of infusion (real-time as a continuous measurement), and an interaction term between study drug and time, in order to estimate the association between treatment arms and change in the inflammatory marker over the follow-up time points. Sensitivity analysis was done by stratifying participants based on ACS diagnosis (i.e. acute MI compared to unstable angina), and by the use of statins prior to enrollment in the study.

Univariate and multivariable linear regression models were used to study the association between hs-CRP levels at the three time points (as the predictor) and infarct size (as the outcome), after adjustment for potential confounders including age, gender, and those correlated with infarct size in univariate models at a p-value of  < 0.1. Infarct sizes ranged from 0 to 59 % of left ventricular mass, where 0 % represent those who did not develop an infarct, and 59 % was assigned to those who died (n = 4) before imaging, based on the fact that the largest infarct size measured in the study was 58 %. In addition, correlations between hs-CRP at the initial, 6-, and 12-hour determinations and infarct size were assessed using Spearman’s rank correlation. Sensitivity analyses were performed by removing participants who had no infarct to check if the association between hs-CRP and infarct size has the same direction for those who had an infarct versus those who did not. Additional sensitivity analysis was done on participants in the placebo group only to test for the correlation between hs-CRP levels, at the three time points measured, and infarct size, without the effect of GIK. We also ran sensitivity analyses based on ACS diagnosis, and prior use of statins. Because hs-CRP baseline levels were not measured prior to study infusion initiation, but rather, after hospital arrival, the time from when the drug started and time of the first hs-CRP measurement was used as a covariate in regression models.

Results

Characteristics of study population

A total of 143 participants met the inclusion criteria for the biocohort; 68 received GIK and 75 placebo. Not all individuals had complete hs-CRP measurements; participants with at least one hs-CRP measurement available were included in the analysis (n = 143). Additional file 1: Figure S1 illustrates how the biocohort participants were enrolled. Their demographic and clinical characteristics by treatment arm are shown in Table 1. The average age was 64 years in both groups; 77 % of the GIK group and 70 % of the placebo group were men. Chest pain was the chief symptom of 86 % of participants, and they were randomized at a median time of 90 min after ischemic symptom onset. The median time from start of study drug to the measurement of the initial hs-CRP values was 2.5 h in the GIK group and 2.6 h in the placebo group. The entry participant characteristics were well-balanced in the GIK and placebo groups. The clinical characteristics of participants in the biocohort were similar to all IMMEDIATE Trial participants by site of enrollment. The diagnosis of ACS was more common in the biocohort, as expected because a confirmed diagnosis of ACS was a requirement for enrollment into the biocohort (Additional file 1: Table S1).
Table 1

Baseline demographics and clinical characteristics of study participants by treatment group in the biocohort (N = 143)a

Cohort characteristics

No. (%)

N = 143

GIK (N = 68)

Placebo (N = 75)

Age, mean (SD), y

64.5 (12.9)

63.9 (12.8)

Men

52 (76.5)

52 (69.3)

Race

  

 White

66 (97)

71 (95)

Hispanic ethnicity

3 (4.4)

7 (9.3)

Chief complaint on presentation

  

 Chest pain

59 (86.8)

67 (89.3)

 Shortness of breath

1 (1.5)

3 (4)

 Other b

8 (11.7)

5 (6.7)

Medical history

  

 Diabetes

12 (17.6)

19 (25.3)

 Heart Failure

4 (5.9)

7 (9.3)

 AMI

21 (30.9)

24 (32.0)

Medication history

  

 Statins

30 (44.1)

29 (38.7)

 Aspirin

39 (57.3)

44 (58.7)

Minutes from symptom onset to study drug, median (IQR)

86 (51.5–160.5)

81 (53–123)

Minutes from symptom onset to study drug

 0–30

1 (1.5)

0 (0)

 31–60

21 (30.9)

22 (29.3)

 61–90

9 (13.2)

19 (25.3)

 91–180

12 (17.7)

15 (20.0)

 181–360

10 (14.7)

8 (10.7)

 361–24 h

6 (8.8)

5 (6.7)

 Within 24 h, unspecified

3 (4.4)

4 (5.3)

>24 h

6 (8.8)

2 (2.7)

ACI-TIPI score, mean (SD), %

83 (15.7)

83.1 (12.1)

Hospital reperfusion treatment

  

 Thrombolytic therapy

1 (1.5)

1 (1.3)

 PCI

59 (86.8)

56 (74.7)

 Coronary artery bypass graft

0 (0)

2 (2.7)

Confirmed diagnosis

  

 Acute myocardial infarction

58 (85.3)

68 (90.7)

 Any angina

10 (14.7)

7 (9.3)

Time from study drug to biomarker measurement, median (IQR), hours

  

 Initial

2.5 (1.3–3.3)

2.6 (1.9–3.2)

 6 h

6 (6–6.3)

6 (6–6.2)

 12 h

12 (12–12.2)

12.1 (12–12.3)

AMI indicates acute myocardial infarction; ACI-TIPI acute cardiac ischemia time-insensitive predictive instrument; GIK glucose-insulin-potassium; IQR interquartile range; PCI percutaneous coronary intervention; SD standard deviation

aNo significant differences were noted between GIK and placebo groups

bAbdominal pain, back pain, dizziness, heartburn, loss of consciousness, shoulder pain and weakness

Changes in hs-CRP levels

Table 2 shows hs-CRP levels in the first 12 h of drug infusions before logarithmic transformation. Linear regression models were performed to assess the association between admission hs-CRP levels and baseline characteristics. They showed that older people, women and individuals with history of heart failure had higher hs-CRP levels upon admission (Additional file 1: Table S2). In addition the longer time from symptom onset to reperfusion therapy the higher the hs-CRP levels (Additional file 1: Table S2). These associations remained significant after adjusting for the use of study drug. No other clinical characteristics had a significant association with admission hs-CRP values.
Table 2

Hs-CRP Levels in the first 12 h of emergency department admission

 

GIK

Placebo

Hs-CRP

No.

Mean (SD)

Median (IQR)

No.

Mean (SD)

Median (IQR)

Initial hs-CRP mg/L

59

8.1 (17.7)

3.1 (1.4–7.3)

61

12.3 (24.4)

3.2 (1.9–9.3)

6 h hs-CRP mg/L

58

8.6 (17.0)

3.4 (1.8–8.8)

63

15.1 (30.7)

4.2 (2.0–12.4)

12 h hs-CRP mg/L

57

9.2 (16.7)

4.5 (2.3–7.9)

64

17.6 (31.0)

5.9 (3.1–13.7)

GIK indicates glucose-insulin-potassium; Hs-CRP high sensitivity C-reactive protein; IQR interquartile range; SD standard deviation

Table 3

Regression analysis of hs-CRP levels and 30-day infarct sizea

 

All participants

Participants with an infarct

Regression modelsb

No.

Beta Coefficient

P-value

No.

Beta Coefficient

P-value

Initial hs-CRP mg/Lc

83

2.3

0.46

54

3.8

0.35

6 h hs-CRP mg/Lc

85

4.0

0.17

56

5.9

0.13

12 h hs-CRP mg/Lc

83

6.8

0.04

56

10.6

0.02

Delta hs-CRP mg/Ld

78

13.9

0.02

51

23.1

0.01

GIKGIK indicates glucose-insulin-potassium,: Hs-CRP high sensitivity C-reactive protein

aData analyzed using logarithmically transformed hs-CRP values

bAdjusted for age, gender and GIK administration. In addition, the time from when the drug started to the time of the first hs-CRP measurement was used as a covariate. The coefficient represents the fitted increase in infarct size per one unit change in logarithmically trasnformed hs-CRP.

cPer 1 unit increase in hs-CRP levels

dDifference between the initial hs-CRP and 12 h hs-CRP measurements

The hs-CRP measurements increased significantly in both the control and the treatment groups by 6 and 12 h, compared with the initial measurement (P < 0.01 for all intragroup comparisons). Hs-CRP values were not different for those who received GIK versus placebo at the initial and 6-hour measurements; however by 12 h, the hs-CRP levels were slightly higher in placebo-treated versus GIK-treated participants (P = 0.053) (Fig. 1). When comparing delta hs-CRP, the differences between the initial and 12-hour hs-CRP measurements, there were no significant differences in those delta values between treatment arms (Additional file 1: Table S3). Using linear mixed model, hs-CRP levels increased significantly with time in both arms (P < 0.01); however, the rate of change did not differ between the GIK and placebo groups (P = 0.30 for time*treatment interaction). Baseline characteristics associated with initial hs-CRP were added to the model and did not change the above results. In addition, the results remained the same after adjusting for the time from symptom onset to reperfusion therapy. The results also did not change when we stratified the analysis by ACS diagnosis, and by the use of statin therapy prior to study enrollment.
Fig. 1

hs-CRP Levels per Treatment Arm. Time course of mean ± SEM hs-CRP at initial, 6 h and 12 h per treatment arm. GIK indicates glucose-insulin-potassium; Hs-CRP high sensitivity C-reactive protein. *P = 0.053 between groups at 12 h (independent sample t-test). P˂0.01 within group differences between initial and 6 h, 6 h and 12 h, and initial and 12 h (paired sample t-test). Initial time represents the first hs-CRP measurement (median = 2.5 h)

Association between hs-CRP and infarct size

After adjusting for age, gender and GIK administration (variables that were associated with infarct size in univariate models), there were no significant associations between hs-CRP and infarct size at the initial and 6-hour measurements. On the other hand the 12-hour measurement and delta hs-CRP were significantly associated with infarct size (Table 3). Sensitivity analysis done by removing participants with no infarct (i.e. those with an infarct size of 0, or those who died and did not have infarct size measurement available) (n = 31) showed the same association between hs-CRP levels and infarct size (Table 3). Also stratifying participants by ACS diagnosis and statin use prior to study enrollment did not significantly change the study results. Results from spearman’s rank correlation yielded similar associations between hs-CRP and 30-day infarct size (Additional file 1: Fig. S2). When testing for the correlation between hs-CRP and infarct size in the placebo group only, we found that the 12-hour hs-CRP and the delta hs-CRP remained significantly correlated with infarct size (p-value = 0.022 and 0.049, for the 12 h and delta hs-CRP respectively).

Discussion

Our data confirm that plasma hs-CRP concentrations are increased in participants presenting to the ED with ACS, presumably reflecting a state of inflammation. However, the administration of GIK early in ACS did not have a significant impact on hs-CRP levels. Although there was a modest difference between the 12-hour hs-CRP levels with GIK, the delta hs-CRP values was not different between treatment arms. In addition, results of mixed models, adjusting for within and between subjects variability, demonstrated no effect of GIK on hs-CRP over the three time points. These results suggest that the beneficial effects of GIK in ACS observed in the main study [15], at least as reflected in the absence of an effect on hs-CRP, are less likely to be through an anti-inflammatory effect, and may be more extended through a metabolic effect.

Previous studies on the effect of GIK on CRP yielded conflicting results. In a study by Chaudhuri et al., GIK administration started in the emergency department in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (n = 32) and lasting 48 h showed significantly reduced hs-CRP values at 24 and 48 h post-infusion compared to placebo [18]. In contrast, Parikh et al., demonstrated in 25 patients with STEMI that a 24-hour infusion of GIK produced no statistically significant difference in 24 h hs-CRP levels compared with placebo [26]. Additionally a study by Hashemian et al., showed no effect of GIK on hs-CRP levels in 72 patients with STEMI treated within 12 h from symptom onset [27]. Although those studies added GIK to standard care, there are important differences in the use of GIK in the IMMEDIATE Trial. First, unlike prior clinical trials in which GIK was started typically an average of 6 h after onset of ischemic symptoms, following documentation of acute MI [6, 10, 14], in IMMEDIATE, the study drug was started prior to arrival to emergency department, upon emergency medical services (EMS) arrival in the community following a 9-1-1 call, at an average of 90 min after symptom onset [15]. Moreover, the previous studies only included participants with STEMI. In contrast, the IMMEDIATE Trial included participants with ACS, i.e., either unstable angina or acute MI (whether or not STEMI) [15].

Infarct size has shown to be a prognostic marker of adverse clinical outcomes after an acute coronary event [28]. Baseline CRP levels in healthy individuals or in patients with stable angina are independent risk factor for cardiovascular events [29]. Also the rise in CRP after acute MI or during unstable angina pectoris has been shown to be related to outcome [23, 30, 31]. In this study on participants presenting to EMS with ACS, we document a relationship between hs-CRP level measured at 12 h and 30-day infarct size. In addition, the magnitude of change in hs-CRP levels, between the initial and 12-hour values, was related to infarct size. Limiting the analysis to those participants with a documented infarct size measurement, and also to those in the placebo group only, showed similar results. Previous studies have shown no clear relationship between CRP levels on hospital admission and infarct size in patients with acute coronary events [32]; but nevertheless, cumulative or peak CRP levels have been correlated with infarct size [33]. Peak CRP levels are reached by no earlier than 24 h after infarction [34]. Adding to that picture, our hs-CRP measurements reflect that an early rise, within 12 h of ACS symptom onset, correlates with 30-day infarct size. Imaging studies in IMMEDIATE Trial biocohort participants at 30 days showed an 80 % reduction infarct size associated with GIK, both for the entire ACS cohort (n = 110) and in those presenting with STEMI (n = 75) [15]. Therefore the modest reduction seen in hs-CRP levels at 12 h between the two groups may be indirectly related to infarct size.

This study has several limitations. First, although our sample is larger than previous studies on the effect of GIK on hs-CRP levels [18, 26, 27]. the size of the IMMEDIATE Trial biocohort may have limited our power to detect treatment interactions. Second, CRP levels prior to the onset of GIK infusion and after the 12 h infusion were not available. Finally, although CRP is commonly used as an inflammatory biomarker, it is somewhat nonspecific and other biomarkers have been considered as an alternative to CRP. For instance, serum amyloid A, interleukin-6, and adhesion molecules such as soluble intercellular adhesion molecule type 1, similar to CRP, are markers of inflammation that are produced by the liver [35]. Therefore, if GIK exerts an anti-inflammatory effect it may be reflected through biomarkers other than CRP. Nevertheless this study has several strengths including serial hs-CRP levels measurements within 12 h after GIK initiation, compared to other studies, in which the effect of GIK on CRP was assessed at 24–48 h following treatment. Moreover, our data were collected in a randomized placebo-controlled trial, with both GIK and placebo participants having balanced characteristics.

Conclusions

In patients with an ACS, early administration of GIK appears to have no significant effect on hs-CRP levels measured in the first 12 h of treatment infusion. This is consistent with a model that the primary immediate benefits of GIK are more likely metabolic rather than anti-inflammatory. Nevertheless, in order to more fully understand the mechanisms by which GIK exert its potential benefits in patients with an ACS, future research should consider markers of endothelial dysfunction, microvascular dysfunction, and coagulation. Our findings of a possible association between the early rise in hs-CRP levels and infarct size, are consistent with the role of inflammation in extent of infarction, an effect that deserves further investigation as a marker of acute myocardial damage and inflammation.

Abbreviations

ACS: 

Acute coronary syndromes

CRP: 

C-reactive protein

EMS: 

Emergency medical services

FFA: 

Free fatty acid

GIK: 

Glucose-insulin-potassium

hs-CRP: 

High sensitivity C-reactive protein

IMMEDIATE: 

Immediate Myocardial Metabolic Enhancement During Initial Assessment and Treatment in Emergency care

MI: 

Myocardial infarction

STEMI: 

ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The IMMEDIATE Trial was funded by the National Institutes of Health cooperative agreement from National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (U01HL077821, U01HL077826, U01HL077823). The IMMEDIATE Trial is registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00091507). The project described was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health (Grant Numbers UL1 TR000073 and UL1 TR001064). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. Hadeel Alkofide is supported by a scholarship from King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Clinical and Translational Science Graduate Program, Sackler School of Biomedical Sciences, Tufts Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Tufts University
(2)
Department of Clinical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University
(3)
MCRI Center for Translational Genomics, Molecular Cardiology Research Institute, Tufts Medical Center
(4)
Center for Cardiovascular Health Services Research, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center
(5)
Regulatory and Clinical Research Management, Department of Health Sciences, Regis College
(6)
Tufts Clinical and Translational Science Institute, Tufts University
(7)
Department of Genetics and Genomic Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

References

  1. Lee L, Horowitz J, Frenneaux M. Metabolic manipulation in ischaemic heart disease, a novel approach to treatment. Eur Heart J. 2004;25(8):634–41. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ehj.2004.02.018.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Hadj A, Pepe S, Marasco S, Rosenfeldt F. The principles of metabolic therapy for heart disease. Heart Lung Circ. 2003;12 Suppl 2:S55–62.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Schofield RS, Hill JA. Role of metabolically active drugs in the management of ischemic heart disease. Am J Cardiovasc Drugs. 2001;1(1):23–35.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Hadj A, Pepe S, Rosenfeldt F. The clinical application of metabolic therapy for cardiovascular disease. Heart Lung Circ. 2007;16 Suppl 3:S56–64. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlc.2007.04.001.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Sodi-Pallares D, Testelli MR, Fishleder BL, Bisteni A, Medrano GA, Friedland C, et al. Effects of an intravenous infusion of a potassium-glucose-insulin solution on the electrocardiographic signs of myocardial infarction. A preliminary clinical report. Am J Cardiol. 1962;9:166–81.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Apstein CS, Opie LH. Glucose-insulin-potassium (GIK) for acute myocardial infarction: a negative study with a positive value. Cardiovasc Drugs Ther. 1999;13(3):185–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Opie LH, Bruyneel K, Owen P. Effects of glucose, insulin and potassium infusion on tissue metabolic changes within first hour of myocardial infarction in the baboon. Circulation. 1975;52(1):49–57.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Malmberg K, Ryden L, Efendic S, Herlitz J, Nicol P, Waldenstrom A, et al. Randomized trial of insulin-glucose infusion followed by subcutaneous insulin treatment in diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction (DIGAMI study): effects on mortality at 1 year. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995;26(1):57–65.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Mehta SR, Yusuf S, Diaz R, Zhu J, Pais P, Xavier D, et al. Effect of glucose-insulin-potassium infusion on mortality in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the CREATE-ECLA randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2005;293(4):437–46. doi:https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.4.437.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Timmer JR, Svilaas T, Ottervanger JP, Henriques JP, Dambrink JH, van den Broek SA, et al. Glucose-insulin-potassium infusion in patients with acute myocardial infarction without signs of heart failure: the Glucose-Insulin-Potassium Study (GIPS)-II. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(8):1730–1. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2006.01.040.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Oliver MF, Opie LH. Effects of glucose and fatty acids on myocardial ischaemia and arrhythmias. Lancet. 1994;343(8890):155–8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Malmberg K. Prospective randomised study of intensive insulin treatment on long term survival after acute myocardial infarction in patients with diabetes mellitus. DIGAMI (Diabetes Mellitus, Insulin Glucose Infusion in Acute Myocardial Infarction) Study Group. BMJ. 1997;314(7093):1512–5.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Apstein CS. Glucose-insulin-potassium for acute myocardial infarction: remarkable results from a new prospective, randomized trial. Circulation. 1998;98(21):2223–6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. van der Horst IC, Zijlstra F. van 't Hof AW, Doggen CJ, de Boer MJ, Suryapranata H et al. Glucose-insulin-potassium infusion inpatients treated with primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: the glucose-insulin-potassium study: a randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003;42(5):784–91.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Selker HP, Beshansky JR, Sheehan PR, Massaro JM, Griffith JL, D'Agostino RB, et al. Out-of-hospital administration of intravenous glucose-insulin-potassium in patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes: the IMMEDIATE randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2012;307(18):1925–33. doi:https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2012.426.View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  16. Grossman AN, Opie LH, Beshansky JR, Ingwall JS, Rackley CE, Selker HP. Glucose-insulin-potassium revived: current status in acute coronary syndromes and the energy-depleted heart. Circulation. 2013;127(9):1040–8. doi:https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.130625.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Addo TA, Keeley EC, Cigarroa JE, Lange RA, de Lemos JA, Dobbins RL, et al. Effect of glucose-insulin-potassium infusion on plasma free fatty acid concentrations in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2004;94(10):1288–9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2004.07.115.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Chaudhuri A, Janicke D, Wilson MF, Tripathy D, Garg R, Bandyopadhyay A, et al. Anti-inflammatory and profibrinolytic effect of insulin in acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2004;109(7):849–54. doi:https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000116762.77804.FC.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Spagnoli LG, Bonanno E, Sangiorgi G, Mauriello A. Role of inflammation in atherosclerosis. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(11):1800–15. doi:https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.107.038661.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Sano T, Tanaka A, Namba M, Nishibori Y, Nishida Y, Kawarabayashi T, et al. C-reactive protein and lesion morphology in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2003;108(3):282–5. doi:https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000079173.84669.4F.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Pietila K, Harmoinen A, Hermens W, Simoons ML, Van de Werf F, Verstraete M. Serum C-reactive protein and infarct size in myocardial infarct patients with a closed versus an open infarct-related coronary artery after thrombolytic therapy. Eur Heart J. 1993;14(7):915–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Anzai T, Yoshikawa T, Shiraki H, Asakura Y, Akaishi M, Mitamura H, et al. C-reactive protein as a predictor of infarct expansion and cardiac rupture after a first Q-wave acute myocardial infarction. Circulation. 1997;96(3):778–84.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Pietila KO, Harmoinen AP, Jokiniitty J, Pasternack AI. Serum C-reactive protein concentration in acute myocardial infarction and its relationship to mortality during 24 months of follow-up in patients under thrombolytic treatment. Eur Heart J. 1996;17(9):1345–9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Andreotti F, Hackett DR, Haider AW, Roncaglioni MC, Davies GJ, Beacham JL, et al. Von Willebrand factor, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 and C-reactive protein are markers of thrombolytic efficacy in acute myocardial infarction. Thromb Haemost. 1992;68(6):678–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Armstrong EJ, Morrow DA, Sabatine MS. Inflammatory biomarkers in acute coronary syndromes: part II: acute-phase reactants and biomarkers of endothelial cell activation. Circulation. 2006;113(7):e152–5. doi:https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.595538.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Parikh SV, Abdullah SM, Keeley EC, Cigarroa JE, Addo TA, Warner JJ, et al. Effect of glucose-insulin-potassium (GIK) infusion on biomarkers of cardiovascular risk in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI): insight into the failure of GIK. Diab Vasc Dis Res. 2007;4(3):222–5. doi:https://doi.org/10.3132/dvdr.2007.043.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Hashemian MVA, Akaberi A. Effect of glucose–insulin–potassium on Plasma concentrations of C-reactive protein in acute ST- Elevation Myocardial Infarction; A Randomized Clinical Trial. Pak J Med Sci. 2011;27(3):4.Google Scholar
  28. Hombach V, Grebe O, Merkle N, Waldenmaier S, Hoher M, Kochs M, et al. Sequelae of acute myocardial infarction regarding cardiac structure and function and their prognostic significance as assessed by magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Heart J. 2005;26(6):549–57. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehi147.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Lagrand WK, Visser CA, Hermens WT, Niessen HW, Verheugt FW, Wolbink GJ, et al. C-reactive protein as a cardiovascular risk factor: more than an epiphenomenon? Circulation. 1999;100(1):96–102.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Suleiman M, Khatib R, Agmon Y, Mahamid R, Boulos M, Kapeliovich M, et al. Early inflammation and risk of long-term development of heart failure and mortality in survivors of acute myocardial infarction predictive role of C-reactive protein. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(5):962–8. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2005.10.055.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Ohlmann P, Jaquemin L, Morel O, El Behlgiti R, Faure A, Michotey MO, et al. Prognostic value of C-reactive protein and cardiac troponin I in primary percutaneous interventions for ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Am Heart J. 2006;152(6):1161–7. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ahj.2006.07.016.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Haase J, Bayar R, Hackenbroch M, Storger H, Hofmann M, Schwarz CE, et al. Relationship between size of myocardial infarctions assessed by delayed contrast-enhanced MRI after primary PCI, biochemical markers, and time to intervention. J Interv Cardiol. 2004;17(6):367–73. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8183.2004.04078.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Orn S, Manhenke C, Ueland T, Damas JK, Mollnes TE, Edvardsen T, et al. C-reactive protein, infarct size, microvascular obstruction, and left-ventricular remodelling following acute myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2009;30(10):1180–6. doi:https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehp070.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Gruzdeva O, Uchasova E, Dyleva Y, Belik E, Shurygina E, Barbarash O. Insulin resistance and inflammation markers in myocardial infarction. J Inflamm Res. 2013;6:83–90. doi:https://doi.org/10.2147/JIR.S43081.PubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
  35. Ridker PM, Rifai N, Stampfer MJ, Hennekens CH. Plasma concentration of interleukin-6 and the risk of future myocardial infarction among apparently healthy men. Circulation. 2000;101(15):1767–72.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Alkofide et al. 2015

Advertisement