Table 5.
Predictive value of TyG index for primary endpoint in different Cox proportional hazards models
| TyG index as a nominal variablea | TyG index as a continuous variableb | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | P value | HR | 95% CI | P value | |
| Crude model | 4.610 | 3.253–6.533 | < 0.001 | 3.367 | 2.677–4.235 | < 0.001 |
| Model 1 | 4.858 | 3.367–7.011 | < 0.001 | 3.459 | 2.731–4.381 | < 0.001 |
| Model 2 | 3.774 | 2.553–5.580 | < 0.001 | 2.900 | 2.194–3.832 | < 0.001 |
| Model 3 | 3.994 | 2.699–5.991 | < 0.001 | 3.031 | 2.294–4.005 | < 0.001 |
| Model 4 | 4.062 | 2.732–6.040 | < 0.001 | 3.208 | 2.400–4.289 | < 0.001 |
Model 1: adjusted for age, sex (female), BMI, SBP, DBP, smoking, drinking, duration of diabetes, dyslipidemia, prior MI, PCI, stroke and PVD
Model 2: adjusted for variables included in Model 1 and diagnosis (NSTEMI), TC, HDL-C, eGFR, HbA1c, LVEF
Model 3: adjusted for variables included in Model 2 and SYNTAX score, LM treatment, DCB use, complete revascularization and number of stents
Model 4: adjusted for variables included in Model 3 and DAPT at discharge, DAPT interruption in 12 months, statins at discharge, statins interruption in 12 months, oral hypoglycemic agents (metformin, alpha-glucosidase inhibitor, sulfonylurea, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor) at discharge and insulin at discharge
Italic values indicate statistically significant associations
TyG triglyceride glucose, HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval
aThe HR was examined regarding lower TyG index as reference (stratified by the optimal cutoff point of TyG index determined by ROC curve analysis)
bThe HR was examined by per 1-unit increase of TyG index