Abstract
Objective:
Prediabetes is a dysglycemic state and is associated with subtle myocardial injury and dysfunction. We evaluated atrial conduction times (ACTs) and atrial electromechanical delays (EMDs) in prediabetic patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).
Methods:
In the present study, we recruited 128 consecutive patient candidates (40 euglycemic, 48 prediabetic, and 40 diabetic patients) for coro- nary artery bypass grafting. ACTs were measured using tissue Doppler imaging (TDI). The time intervals between the beginning of the P wave in the surface electrocardiogram and the peak of the a¢ wave in TDI (PA) in the septal and lateral mitral annuli and the lateral tricuspid annulus were measured and termed as “septal PA,” “lateral PA,” and “right ventricular (RV) PA,” respectively. The differences between lateral and septal PA, septal and RV PA, and lateral and RV PA were termed as “left intra-atrial EMD,” “right intra-atrial EMD,” and “inter-atrial EMD” respectively.
Results:
Septal PA, lateral PA, RV PA, left and right intra-atrial EMDs, and inter-atrial EMD were not statistically different between these three groups. Furthermore, multivariable linear regression models, adjusted for potential confounders, showed that glycemic state was not associated with ACTs, left and right intra-atrial EMDs, and inter-atrial EMD.
Conclusion:
There were no significant differences between the euglycemic, prediabetic, and diabetic patients with CAD regarding ACTs and atrial EMDs.
Keywords: prediabetes, tissue Doppler echocardiography, atrial conduction time, coronary artery disease
Introduction
Prediabetes is a dysglycemic state where there is abnormal sugar metabolism, but it does not fulfill the criteria for diabetes mellitus (1). The American Diabetes Association has defined prediabetes as fasting plasma glucose levels between 100 mg/dL and 125 mg/dL or 2 hour plasma glucose after 75 g of oral glucose intake between 140 mg/dL and 199 mg/dL or hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) between 5.7% and 6.4% (2). It has been estimated that by the year 2035, approximately 471 million people in the world will be affected by prediabetes (3). The conversion rate from prediabetes to diabetes has been reported to range between 4% and 19% (4). Prediabetes is associated with cardiovascular morbidity and mortality (5, 6). Furthermore, it has been shown that prediabetes is allied to subtle myocardial injury and dysfunction (7). Recently, left atrial (LA) and right atrial (RA) mechanical dysfunction has been demonstrated in prediabetes (8).
In patients with diabetes, the prevalence of atrial fibrillation is about 15%, and the hazard ratio of its occurrence is 1.5 compared with nondiabetic subjects (9, 10). Atrial conduction times (ACTs) evaluated using tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) are used as a noninvasive, helpful method for the evaluation of electrical and structural atrial remodeling (11–13). ACTs can also predict the occurrence of atrial fibrillation (14). ACTs measured using TDI have been evaluated in several conditions, such as diabetes mellitus (15–17), metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance state (18, 19), and obesity (20). The association between ACTs and inflammation and subclinical atherosclerosis in patients with type 2 diabetes has been demonstrated (16), whereas studies on ACTs in prediabetic patients are very limited (21). To the best of our knowledge, there are currently no studies on ACTs in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) based on their glycemic state. On the basis of this evidence, we hypothesized that an aggravation in glycemic state is in tandem with prolonged ACTs in patients with significant CAD.
Methods
Study population
Between November 2015 and February 2016, we enrolled 128 consecutive patients admitted for coronary artery bypass grafting in our hospital. Sample venous blood was obtained after 12 hours of overnight fasting. These samples were analyzed for complete blood count and biochemistry tests. In total, 612 patients were excluded from our study. The exclusion criteria comp- rised history of myocardial infarction in the preceding 4 weeks, rhythms other than sinus rhythm, bundle branch block, cardiomyopathies, valvular stenosis of any degree, valvular regurgitation > mild degree, history of thyroid disease, left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction > mild degree, LV ejection fraction <45%, history of cancer, HbA1c >11%, creatinine >1.5 mg/dL, history of hepatic diseases, type 1 diabetes mellitus, estimated systolic pulmonary artery pressure on echocardiography >35 mm Hg, and poor echocardiography window. Diabetes was defined as fasting blood sugar >126 mg/dL in two samples or using oral antidiabetic agents or insulin. Prediabetes was defined as HbA1c between 5.7% and 6.4%. Normal patients were defined as HbA1c <5.7%. The laboratory staff was blind to the echocardiography data. CAD burden was evaluated via a method previously described by Gensini et al. (22). In summary, 40 patients were allocated to the diabetic group, 48 patients to the prediabetic group, and 40 patients to the euglycemic group. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board, and an informed consent was obtained from the patients.
Echocardiography
All echocardiographic examinations were performed and analyzed by an experienced echocardiologist, who was blind to the patients’ glycemic state. Echocardiography was performed in the left lateral position by recording one lead of the electrocardiogram (ECG; Lead II). The gain of the ECG lead was adjusted to obtain the highest P wave. A commercial echocardiography setting (GE Medical Systems S5, U.S.A., Wauwatosa, WI, 2–4 MHz probe) was used for echocardiography. LV end-systolic and end-diastolic diameters and volumes, septal and posterior wall thickness, LA diameters, mean maximum LA volume in the 2- and 4-chamber views, biplane LV ejection fraction, mid-cavity (RV) diameter, tricuspid annular systolic plane excursion, maximum RA volume and LV mass, peak velocity of the mitral and tricuspid flow in early and late diastole (E wave and A wave, respectively), deceleration time of mitral E wave, peak systolic and diastolic waves of the pulmonary vein (S and D, respectively), peak velocities of the myocardium in systole and in early and late diastole (s¢, e¢, and a¢) in the tricuspid annulus, and the septal and lateral sides of the mitral annulus were measured using pulsed-wave TDI according to the recommendations of the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) (23, 24). All Doppler measurements in the left chambers were averaged in three cardiac cycles, and those in the right chambers were averaged in five cardiac cycles. Maximal effort was applied to achieve maximal alignment to the mentioned cardiac walls. The velocity scale of recording was between –20 cm/s and 20 cm/s. The horizontal sweep at analysis time was set at 67–100 mm/s. The gain was adjusted to obtain the least possible noise in the recording. The time interval between the beginning of the P wave in the surface ECG and the peak of the a¢ wave (PA) was adopted as ACT (Fig. 1). ACTs at the tricuspid annulus and the septal and lateral mitral annuli were measured and termed as “RV PA,” “septal PA,” and “lateral PA,” res- pectively. The differences between septal PA and RV PA, lateral and septal PA, and lateral and RV PA were calculated and termed as “right intra-atrial electromechanical delay (EMD),” “left intra-atrial EMD,” and “inter-atrial EMD,” respectively. The mean value of three consecutive cardiac cycles was used in the analysis. The average of e¢ (septal and lateral) was computed, and E/e¢ for LV with the peak velocity of the mitral E wave and the averaged e¢ was calculated. E/e¢ for RV was computed with the peak velocity of the tricuspid E wave and the e¢ of the tricuspid annulus.
Figure 1.
Measurement of atrial conduction times from the beginning of the P wave on the surface electrocardiogram to the peak of the a¢ wave (PA) using tissue Doppler imaging
Statistical analysis
The categorical data are presented as frequencies and percentages. The continuous data are presented as means and standard deviations (SDs), if normally distributed; otherwise, they are presented as median and interquartile (25th–75th) ranges. The continuous data were compared between the euglycemic, prediabetic, and diabetic patients using the one-way analysis of variance or the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis H test, as appropriate. The Bonferroni-adjusted method was employed for pairwise comparisons if the omnibus test was significant. Additionally, the categorical data were compared between the above-mentioned three groups using the χ2 test or the Fisher exact test, as appropriate. Correlations were evaluated using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Because left and right intra-atrial EMDs and inter-atrial EMD were not normally distributed, we logarithmically transformed these variables for the purposes of normalization. Multivariable linear regression models were emp- loyed to determine the association of the glycemic state groups with ACTs, left and right intra-atrial EMDs, and inter-atrial EMD adjusted for heart rate, body mass index, cigarette smoking, RV diameter, averaged e¢, and LV E/e¢ ratio as the potential confounders. Data analysis was performed using IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) for Windows (version 23.0) (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.).
Results
The clinical, laboratory, and demographic characteristics of our study patients are depicted in Table 1. These groups were significantly different in terms of body mass index, heart rate at the time of echocardiography, and cigarette smoking. The heart rate of prediabetic patients was higher than that of diabetic patients, and the body mass index of euglycemic patients was less than that of diabetic patients. The diabetes duration was 3.3 (0.5–7.0) years, and 31 (78%) diabetic patients used insulin or oral antidiabetic agents. The frequency of patients with 1-, 2-, and 3-vessel disease and the Gensini score as a marker of CAD burden were not significantly different between the groups. The baseline echocardiographic data are presented in Table 2. RV diameter, e¢ septal, e¢ lateral, e¢/a¢ ratio lateral, average of e¢ septal and lateral, and LV E/e¢ ratio were significantly different between the euglycemic and diabetic groups. There were no significant differences concerning septal PA, lateral PA, RV PA, left and right intra-atrial EMDs, and inter-atrial EMD (Table 3). Our multivariable analysis adjusted for potential confounders (Table 4) showed that glycemic state was not associated with septal PA, lateral PA, RV PA, right intra-atrial EMD, and inter-atrial EMD. The multivariable analysis was not significant regarding left intra-atrial EMD.
Table 1.
Demographic, clinical, and laboratory data of the study groups categorized according to their glycemic state
| Group variables | Euglycemic patients (n=40) | Prediabetic patients (n=48) | Diabetic patients (n=40) | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex, male, n (%) | 34 (85%) | 38 (79%) | 27 (68%) | 0.162 |
| Age, y | 59.7±1.2 | 61.1±8.2 | 60.9±7.0 | 0.695 |
| SBP, mm Hg | 119.9±12.7 | 117.6±13.5 | 122.8±17.0 | 0.246 |
| DBP, mm Hg | 75.3±7.8 | 73.1±8.3 | 75.1±8.7 | 0.402 |
| Heart rate, bpm | 70.5±12.5 | 65.4±11.3 | 74.3±11.6 | 0.002* |
| BMI, kg/m2 | 26.4±2.3 | 27.6±3.9 | 28.6±4.7 | 0.034** |
| Body surface area, m2 | 1.8±0.1 | 1.8±0.2 | 1.8±0.2 | 0.814 |
| NYHA class | ||||
| I, n (%) | 3 (8%) | 8 (17%) | 6 (15%) | 0.419 |
| II, n (%) | 31 (78%) | 30 (63%) | 26 (65%) | 0.288 |
| III, n (%) | 6 (15%) | 10 (21%) | 8 (20%) | 0.761 |
| Hypertension, n (%) | 16 (40%) | 27 (56%) | 24 (60%) | 0.159 |
| Dyslipidemia, n (%) | 12 (30%) | 20 (42%) | 20 (50%) | 0.187 |
| Cigarette smoking, n (%) | 9 (23%) | 20 (42%) | 21 (53%) | 0.020 |
| FH, n (%) | 9 (23%) | 18 (38%) | 14 (35%) | 0.288 |
| ACE/ARB use, n (%) | 24 (60%) | 32 (67%) | 28 (70%) | 0.630 |
| Calcium blocker use, n (%) | 8 (20%) | 5 (10%) | 4 (10%) | 0.319 |
| Beta-blocker use, n (%) | 18 (45%) | 11 (23%) | 12 (30%) | 0.082 |
| Statin use, n (%) | 34 (85%) | 37 (77%) | 25 (63%) | 0.061 |
| Diuretic use, n (%) | 3 (8%) | 3 (6%) | 7 (18%) | 0.258 |
| Nitrate use, n (%) | 29 (73%) | 35 (73%) | 28 (70%) | 0.950 |
| Aspirin use, n (%) | 23 (58%) | 20 (42%) | 19 (48%) | 0.331 |
| Number of diseased vessel | ||||
| One, n (%) | 2 (5%) | 4 (8%) | 3 (8%) | 0.911 |
| Two, n (%) | 8 (20%) | 7 (15%) | 7 (18%) | 0.797 |
| Three, n (%) | 30 (75%) | 37 (77%) | 30 (75%) | 0.965 |
| LAD, n (%) | 40 (100%) | 48 (100%) | 40 (100%) | >0.999 |
| LCX, n (%) | 36 (90%) | 42 (88%) | 33 (83%) | 0.601 |
| RCA, n (%) | 32 (80%) | 39 (81%) | 34 (85%) | 0.831 |
| Gensini score | 58.8 (40.3–91.3) | 68.0 (48.0–99.0) | 64.0 (48.4–85.3) | 0.529 |
| Hemoglobin level, mg/dL | 14.8±1.6 | 14.7±1.5 | 14.0±1.5 | 0.070 |
| FBS level, mg/dL | 87.0±8.1 | 96.4±10.4 | 135.9±42.4 | <0.001*** |
| HbA1c, % | 5.5±0.2 | 6.1±0.3 | 7.4±1.1 | <0.001**** |
| Serum triglyceride level, mg/dL | 130.0 (91.3–173.0) | 114.0 (90.5–183.5) | 137.5 (94.3–252.8) | 0.396 |
| Serum cholesterol level, mg/dL | 142.6±32.0 | 150.8±36.7 | 151.4±35.3 | 0.445 |
| Serum HDL level, mg/dL | 37.8±9.1 | 36.9±7.9 | 36.1±7.6 | 0.651 |
| Serum LDL level, mg/dL | 86.9±28.9 | 95.5±32.7 | 92.2±29.7 | 0.416 |
| Serum urea level, mg/dL | 35.8±10.9 | 35.6±8.5 | 37.7±10.8 | 0.591 |
| Serum creatinine level, mg/dL | 0.9±0.2 | 0.9±0.1 | 0.8±0.2 | 0.329 |
Data are presented as means±standard deviations for the normally distributed continuous variables, median and interquartile (25th–75th) ranges for the continuous variables with a skewed distribution, and frequencies (%) for the categorical variables. To compare the continuous data, we used the one-way analysis of variance or the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis H test, as appropriate. The Bonferroni-adjusted method was employed for pairwise comparisons if the omnibus test was significant (defined in the following table with symbols). To compare the categorical data, we used the χ2 test or the Fisher exact test, as appropriate.
- prediabetes vs. diabetes, P value =0.002;
- euglycemia vs. diabetes, P value =0.029;
- euglycemia vs. diabetes, P value <0.001; prediabetes vs. diabetes, P value <0.001;
- euglycemia vs. diabetes, P value <0.001; prediabetes vs. diabetes, P value <0.001; euglycemia vs. diabetes; P value <0.001. ACEI/ARB - angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/Angiotensin receptor blocker; BMI - body mass index; DBP - diastolic blood pressure; FBS - fasting blood sugar; FH - family history of coronary artery disease; HbA1c - glycated hemoglobin; HDL - high-density lipoprotein; LAD - left anterior descending artery; LCX - left circumflex artery; LDL - low-density lipoprotein; NYHA - New York Heart Association; RCA - right coronary artery; SBP - systolic blood pressure
Table 2.
Standard echocardiography data of the study groups categorized according to their glycemic state
| Group variables | Euglycemic patients (n=40) | Prediabetic patients (n=48) | Diabetic patients (n=40) | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LVEDV index, mm3/m2 | 42.1±10.1 | 43.3±10.3 | 41.0±9.4 | 0.568 |
| LVESV index, mm3/m2 | 18.3±4.9 | 18.1±5.5 | 18.6±5.3 | 0.925 |
| LVEF, % | 56.4±5.8 | 58.2±7.1 | 55.0±7.2 | 0.090 |
| LA diameter, mm | 36.5±3.7 | 35.8±3.7 | 35.8±3.5 | 0.607 |
| Posterior wall thickness, mm | 9.0±1.1 | 9.3±1.3 | 9.5±1.3 | 0.164 |
| Interventricular septal thickness, mm | 9.2±1.2 | 9.3±1.5 | 9.6±1.5 | 0.355 |
| LV mass, g | 154.0±39.3 | 151.4±45.6 | 157.4±42.6 | 0.808 |
| LV mass index, g/m2 | 84.3±20.5 | 83.4±22.4 | 87.6±22.6 | 0.645 |
| RV diameter, mm | 29.1±2.5 | 28.7±3.4 | 27.4±3.2 | 0.040* |
| TAPSE, mm | 21.7±3.2 | 21.7±2.5 | 22.0±3.6 | 0.900 |
| LAV index, mm3/m2 | 24.9±7.0 | 25.4±7.1 | 25.4±5.7 | 0.934 |
| RAV index, mm3/m2 | 16.8 (14.4–22.8) | 17.0 (13.6–21.8) | 14.3 (10.6–20.1) | 0.093 |
| Mitral E, cm/s | 63.8±16.9 | 60.1±14.3 | 63.9±17.0 | 0.438 |
| Mitral A, cm/s | 69.8±18.7 | 70.1±19.4 | 75.0±19.3 | 0.388 |
| Mitral DT, ms | 237.5±57.5 | 232.5±62.8 | 243.8±58.6 | 0.683 |
| Mitral E/A ratio | 0.86 (0.70–1.16) | 0.82 (0.72–0.94) | 0.82 (0.67–1.03) | 0.587 |
| S, cm/s | 52.3±13.4 | 47.9±9.0 | 49.5±7.8 | 0.148 |
| D, cm/s | 36.8±10.2 | 34.4±8.0 | 33.1±7.0 | 0.162 |
| S/D ratio | 1.5±0.3 | 1.4±0.3 | 1.5±0.3 | 0.296 |
| Tricuspid E, cm/s | 37.0±9.7 | 35.4±6.8 | 36.3±7.8 | 0.653 |
| Tricuspid A, cm/s | 35.9±9.4 | 36.5±9.0 | 39.2±12.8 | 0.322 |
| Tricuspid E/A ratio | 1.1±0.2 | 1.0±0.3 | 1.0±0.2 | 0.392 |
| SPAP, mm Hg | 27.6±4.5 | 27.6±4.3 | 25.8±3.8 | 0.095 |
| Septal s’, cm/s | 7.4±1.1 | 7.0±1.3 | 6.8±1.1 | 0.092 |
| Septal e’, cm/s | 7.2±1.8 | 6.7±1.8 | 6.2±1.5 | 0.044** |
| Septal a’, cm/s | 9.6±1.8 | 8.9±1.5 | 9.1±1.3 | 0.106 |
| Septal e’/a’ ratio | 0.8±0.3 | 0.8±0.2 | 0.7±0.2 | 0.166 |
| Lateral s’, cm/s | 8.4±2.3 | 7.7±2.0 | 8.1±1.5 | 0.286 |
| Lateral e’, cm/s | 9.5±1.9 | 8.9±2.2 | 8.2±1.8 | 0.015*** |
| Lateral a’, cm/s | 9.8±2.6 | 10.0±2.5 | 10.4±2.2 | 0.519 |
| Lateral e’/a’ ratio | 1.0 (0.8–1.1) | 0.9 (0.7–1.1) | 0.8 (0.7–1.0) | 0.012**** |
| Averaged septal and lateral e’, cm/s | 8.3±1.6 | 7.8±1.8 | 7.2±1.5 | 0.010† |
| RV s’, cm/s | 12.2±2.4 | 11.4±2.2 | 11.9±2.5 | 0.285 |
| RV e’, cm/s | 8.6±2.4 | 8.2±2.8 | 7.8±2.1 | 0.384 |
| RV a’, cm/s | 14.7±4.0 | 13.3±3.4 | 13.6±3.2 | 0.166 |
| RV e’/a’ ratio | 0.6 (0.5–0.7) | 0.6 (0.5–0.8) | 0.6 (0.5–0.7) | 0.782 |
| LV E/e’ ratio | 7.8±2.1 | 8.0±2.3 | 9.0±1.8 | 0.024†† |
| RV E/e’ ratio | 4.2 (3.5–5.5) | 4.6 (3.3–5.9) | 4.4 (3.9–5.7) | 0.642 |
Data are presented as means±standard deviations for the normally distributed continuous variables and median and interquartile (25th–75th) ranges for the continuous variables with a skewed distribution. To compare the continuous data, we used the one-way analysis of variance or the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis H test, as appropriate. The Bonferroni-adjusted method was employed for pairwise comparisons if the omnibus test was significant (defined below the table with symbols).
- euglycemia vs. diabetes, P value =0.050;
- euglycemia vs. diabetes, P value = 0.039;
- euglycemia vs. diabetes, P value =0.012;
euglycemia vs. diabetes, P value =0.007;
- euglycemia vs. diabetes, P value =0.012;
- euglycemia vs. diabetes, P value =0.038. DT - deceleration time; LA - left atrium; LAV - left atrial volume; LV - left ventricle; LVEDV - left ventricular end-diastolic volume; LVEF - left ventricular ejection fraction; LVESV - left ventricular end-systolic volume; RAV - right atrial volume; RV - right ventricle; SPAP - systolic pulmonary artery pressure; TAPSE - tricuspid annular plane excursion
Table 3.
Atrial conduction times, left and right intra-atrial electromechanical delays, and inter-atrial electromechanical delay of the study groups according to their glycemic state
| Group variables | Euglycemic patients (n=40) | Prediabetic patients (n=48) | Diabetic patients (n=40) | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Septal PA, ms | 88.7±21.8 | 92.0±16.7 | 84.7±20.3 | 0.223 |
| Lateral PA, ms | 106.0±20.5 | 110.9±15.9 | 104.1±20.0 | 0.212 |
| RV PA, ms | 74.5±24.1 | 73.4±18.0 | 70.3±22.4 | 0.663 |
| Lateral PA-Septal PA, ms | 16.2 (10.3–22.3) | 18.3 (12.3–23.9) | 20.0 (12.0–24.9) | 0.582 |
| Septal PA-RV PA, ms | 10.7 (5.0–18.8) | 16.2 (10.1–26.2) | 12.5 (5.5–22.3) | 0.250 |
| Lateral PA-RV PA, ms | 31.8 (22.1–42.8) | 36.7 (26.4–48.0) | 32.0 (21.0–44.3) | 0.183 |
Data are presented as means±standard deviations for the normally distributed continuous variables and median and interquartile (25th–75th) ranges for the continuous variables with a skewed distribution. To compare the continuous data, we used the one-way analysis of variance or the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis H test, as appropriate. PA - the time interval from the onset of the P wave on the surface ECG to the peak of a’ in tissue Doppler imaging; RV - right ventricle
Table 4.
Adjusted association between glycemic state, atrial conduction times, right intra-atrial electromechanical delay, and inter-atrial electromechanical delay
| Variables | Septal PA | Lateral PA | RV PA | Log (Septal PA-RA PA) | Log (Lateral PA-RV PA) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β | P | β | P | β | P | β | P | β | P | |
| Diabetes | -0.11 | 0.289 | -0.07 | 0.497 | -0.05 | 0.648 | -0.12 | 0.249 | -0.02 | 0.839 |
| Prediabetes | 0.01 | 0.920 | 0.04 | 0.722 | -0. 10 | 0.352 | 0.14 | 0.172 | 0.20 | 0.065 |
| Averaged e’ | -0.45 | <0.001 | -0.45 | <0.001 | -0.24 | 0.017 | -0.28 | 0.005 | -0.22 | 0.034 |
| LV E/e’ | -0.27 | 0.006 | -0.34 | <0.001 | -0.28 | 0.006 | 0.02 | 0.818 | -0.01 | 0.899 |
| Heart rate | -0.15 | 0.101 | -0.22 | 0.016 | -0.31 | 0.001 | 0.27 | 0.003 | 0.19 | 0.054 |
| Body mass index | 0.01 | 0.893 | 0.15 | 0.067 | 0.01 | 0.896 | 0.02 | 0.816 | 0.15 | 0.088 |
| Cigarette smoking | -0.09 | 0.299 | -0.16 | 0.061 | -0.12 | 0.177 | 0.09 | 0.327 | -0.03 | 0.722 |
| RV diameter | 0.04 | 0.675 | -0.02 | 0.842 | -0.12 | 0.187 | 0.23 | 0.012 | 0.09 | 0.368 |
Multivariable linear regression was used to determine the association between the glycemic state groups and ACTs and left and right intra-atrial electromechanical delays and inter-atrial electromechanical delay adjusted for the potential confounders. LV - left ventricle; PA - the time interval from the onset of the P wave on the surface electrocardiogram to the peak of a’ in tissue Doppler imaging; RV - right ventricle
Discussion
Our study showed no significant differences apropos ACTs, left and right intra-atrial EMDs, and inter-atrial EMD according to the glycemic state in patients with CAD even after adjusting for potential confounders.
There have been several studies on ACTs evaluated using TDI in diabetic patients (15–17) and one study on ACTs in patients with impaired fasting glucose (21). Nevertheless, CAD was considered an exclusion criterion in these studies. There are, therefore, no data on ACTs evaluated using TDI in CAD patients with or without diabetes. In these studies, CAD was excluded only by the presence of a history of CAD, and the control groups comprised euglycemic and prediabetic patients. It has been shown that atrial size is correlated with ACTs (25), but RA size in these studies has not been reported. On the strength of such evidence, our study is the first of its kind to evaluate ACTs in patients having documented CAD with prediabetes compared with euglycemic and diabetic patients with CAD.
Akyel et al. (15) showed that septal PA, lateral PA, left and right intra-atrial EMDs, and inter-atrial EMD were prolonged in patients with type 2 diabetes compared with nondiabetic patients, while RV PA was similar. Most of the diabetic patients and control subjects had no LV diastolic dysfunction. As previously mentioned, patients with CAD were excluded by history taking; however, it is highly probable that such patients were indeed included in that study. Furthermore, the control patients comprised prediabetic and euglycemic patients, and the authors failed to mention the duration of diabetes and RA size.
Demir et al. (17) demonstrated that ACTs, left and right intra-EMDs, and inter-atrial EMD were prolonged in patients with type 2 diabetes. In their study, CAD was excluded only by history taking. The control subjects comprised prediabetic and euglycemic subjects. LA size was different between the two groups. Although the researchers tried to adjust ACTs according to LA size, they selected linear atrial diameters for adjustment. It would have been preferable had they adjusted ACTs according to the absolute LA volume. It seems that LV diastolic function was normal in most of the study patients. The authors failed to measure RA size.
Ayhan et al. (21) compared ACTs between a subgroup of patients with prediabetes (impaired fasting glucose) and euglycemic subjects and reported that septal PA, lateral PA, left intra-atrial EMD, and inter-atrial EMD were prolonged in the patients with impaired fasting glucose compared with the euglycemic subjects. CAD was excluded if there was a history of cardiovascular events. The authors did not clearly present the LV diastolic function of the subjects nor did they report RA size.
The differences between our results and those in the aforementioned studies can be explained by the following facts. First, all of our study patients had documented significant CAD, while the previous studies (15, 17, 21) have tried to exclude these patients, with the exclusion seeming unsatisfactory. In a recent study, it was demonstrated that LA mechanical function was not different between CAD patients with and without diabetes (26), which provides evidence in favor of our findings. Consequently, it can be hypothesized that the presence of an ischemic milieu modulates the effects of a dysglycemic state on ACTs, such that the difference due to dysglycemia cannot manifest itself. The interaction between an ischemic milieu and glycemic state vis-à-vis ACTs should be further evaluated by future studies. Second, while LV diastolic function in previous studies seems to be normal for most of the subjects, in our study, all of the patients had mild LV diastolic dysfunction. The interaction between diastolic function and glycemic state concerning ACTs merits in-depth analysis in future investigations. Third, in the aforesaid studies, ACTs were measured from the beginning of the P wave in the surface ECG to the beginning of the a¢ wave in TDI, whereas we measured ACTs from the beginning of the P wave to the peak of a¢ in TDI. The correlation between these two methods has not been studied yet. Furthermore, according to a report, the correlation between ACTs measured using TDI and invasive electrophysiology study is moderate (27).
Study limitations
The main limitation of our study is its small sample size. Also, it was not possible for us to follow up the patients apropos the occurrence of postoperative atrial fibrillation. We assessed ACTs using TDI, but the gold standard for the evaluation of ACTs is invasive electrophysiology study.
Conclusions
Our study showed that septal PA, lateral PA, RV PA, left and right intra-atrial EMDs, and inter-atrial EMD measured via pulsed-wave TDI were not significantly different among CAD patients categorized according to their glycemic state even after adjustment for potential confounders. These findings can be due to the presence of an ischemic milieu or LV diastolic dysfunction in all of our study groups. Larger studies for the evaluation of interaction between glycemic state, ischemia, and LV diastolic function are needed in the future for further clarification of these issues.
Footnotes
Conflict of interest: None declared.
Peer-review: Externally peer-reviewed.
Authorship contributions: Concept – All authors; Design – All authors; Supervision – All authors; Fundings – All authors; Materials – All authors; Data collection &/or processing – All authors; Analysis and/or interpretation – All authors; Literature review – All authors; Writing – All authors; Critical review – All authors.
References
- 1.Buysschaert M, Bergman M. Definition of prediabetes. Med Clin North Am. 2011;95:289–97. doi: 10.1016/j.mcna.2010.11.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes-2015 abridged for primary care providers. Clin Diabetes. 2015;33:97–111. doi: 10.2337/diaclin.33.2.97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas. 6th ed. Brussels, Belgium: International Diabetes Federation; 2013. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Gerstein HC, Santaguida P, Raina P, Morrison KM, Balion C, Hunt D, et al. Annual incidence and relative risk of diabetes in people with various categories of dysglycemia: a systematic overview and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2007;78:305–12. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2007.05.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Barr EL, Zimmet PZ, Welborn TA, Jolley D, Magliano DJ, Dunstan DW, et al. Risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in individuals with diabetes mellitus, impaired fasting glucose, and impaired glucose tolerance The Australian Diabetes, Obesity, and Lifestyle Study (AusDiab) Circulation. 2007;116:151–7. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.685628. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Huang Y, Cai X, Chen P, Mai W, Tang H, Huang Y, et al. Associations of prediabetes with all-cause and cardiovascular mortality: a meta-analysis. Ann Med. 2014;46:684–92. doi: 10.3109/07853890.2014.955051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Selvin E, Lazo M, Chen Y, Shen L, Rubin J, McEvoy JW, et al. Diabetes, pre-diabetes and incidence of subclinical myocardial damage. Circulation. 2014;130:1374–82. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.114.010815. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Tadic M, Ilic S, Cuspidi C, Ivanovic B, Bukarica L, Kostic N, et al. Left and right atrial phasic function and deformation in untreated patients with prediabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015;31:65–76. doi: 10.1007/s10554-014-0536-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Movahed MR, Hashemzadeh M, Jamal MM. Diabetes mellitus is a strong, independent risk for atrial fibrillation and flutter in addition to other cardiovascular disease. Int J Cardiol. 2005;105:315–21. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2005.02.050. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Aksnes TA, Schmieder RE, Kjeldsen SE, Ghani S, Hua TA, Julius S. Impact of new-onset diabetes mellitus on development of atrial fibrillation and heart failure in high-risk hypertension (from the VALUE Trial) Am J Cardiol. 2008;101:634–8. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2007.10.025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Karapınar H, Acar G, Kırma C, Kaya Z, Karavelioğlu Y, Küçükdurmaz Z, et al. Delayed right atrial lateral electromechanical coupling relative to the septal one can be associated with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2013;17:2172–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Arı H, Arı S, Akkaya M, Aydın C, Emlek N, Sarıgül OY, et al. Predictive value of atrial electromechanical delay for atrial fibrillation recurrence. Cardiol J. 2013;20:639–47. doi: 10.5603/CJ.2013.0164. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Çalık AN, Özcan KS, CağdaşM, Güngör B, Karaca G, Gürkan U, et al. Electromechanical delay detected by tissue Doppler echocardiography is associated with the frequency of attacks in patients with lone atrial fibrillation. Cardiol J. 2014;21:138–43. doi: 10.5603/CJ.a2013.0106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Yuasa T, Imoto Y. Usefulness of tissue doppler imaging-derived atrial conduction time for prediction of atrial fibrillation. Circ J. 2015;80:58–9. doi: 10.1253/circj.CJ-15-1256. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Akyel A, Öksüz F, Karadeniz M, Yarlıoğlueş M, Ergün G, Cankurt T, et al. Atrial electromechanical delay in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2014;126:101–5. doi: 10.1007/s00508-013-0477-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Bakırcı EM, Demirtaş L, Değirmenci H, Topçu S, Demirelli S, Hamur H, et al. Relationship of the total atrial conduction time to subclinical atherosclerosis, inflammation and echocardiographic parameters in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2015;70:73–80. doi: 10.6061/clinics/2015(02)01. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Demir K, Avcı A, Kaya Z, Marakoğlu K, Ceylan E, Yılmaz A, et al. Assessment of atrial electromechanical delay and P-wave dispersion in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Cardiol. 2016;67:378–83. doi: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2015.06.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Li SH, Yang B, Gong HP, Tan HW, Zhong M, Zhang Y, et al. Impaired atrial synchronicity in patients with metabolic syndrome associated with insulin resistance and independent of hypertension. Hypertens Res. 2009;32:791–6. doi: 10.1038/hr.2009.105. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Hung CL, Chao TF, Lai YH, Yen CH, Wang KL, Tsao HM, et al. The relationship among atrium electromechanical interval, insulin resistance, and metabolic syndrome. Can J Cardiol. 2013;29:1263–8. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2013.01.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Yağmur J, Cansel M, Açıkgöz N, Ermiş N, Yağmur M, Ataş H, et al. Assessment of atrial electromechanical delay by tissue Doppler echocardiography in obese subjects. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2011;19:779–83. doi: 10.1038/oby.2010.195. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Ayhan S, Öztürk S, Alçelik A, Özlü MF, Erdem A, Memioğlu T, et al. Atrial conduction time and atrial mechanical function in patients with impaired fasting glucose. J Interv Card Electrophysiol. 2012;35:247–52. doi: 10.1007/s10840-012-9722-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Gensini GG. A more meaningful scoring system for determining the severity of coronary heart disease. Am J Cardiol. 1983;51:606. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9149(83)80105-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Lang RM, Badano LP, Mor-Avi V, Afilalo J, Armstrong A, Ernande L, et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2015;28:1–39. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2014.10.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Nagueh SF, Appleton CP, Gillebert TC, Marino PN, Oh JK, Smiseth OA, et al. Recommendations for the evaluation of left ventricular diastolic function by echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2009;22:107–33. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2008.11.023. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Chao TF, Sung SH, Wang KL, Lin YJ, Chang SL, Lo LW, et al. Associations between the atrial electromechanical interval, atrial remodeling and outcome of catheter ablation in paroxysmal atrial fibrillation. Heart. 2011;97:225–30. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2010.212373. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Moinfar A, Hosseinsabet A, Sotudeh-Anvary M. Association between atrial function assessed by 2D-speckle tracking echocardiography and albuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease. J Clin Ultrasound. 2016;44:561–70. doi: 10.1002/jcu.22377. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Deniz A, Şahiner L, Aytemir K, Kaya B, Kabakçı G, Tokgözoğlu L, et al. Tissue Doppler echocardiography can be a useful technique to evaluate atrial conduction time. Cardiol J. 2012;19:487–93. doi: 10.5603/cj.2012.0089. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]