Association Between Hemoglobin A1c and Major Adverse Coronary Events in Patients with Diabetes Following Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Diabetes is associated with a higher risk of major adverse coronary events (MACE) following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Guidelines recommend disparate targets for glycemic control of patients with diabetes who have undergone CABG, ranging from a target hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of < 7.0% to 7.1-8.5%, based on data from non-CABG patients. To date, no study has evaluated the long-term impact of HbA1c concentrations on MACE post-CABG. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between HbA1c and MACE in CABG patients with diabetes. METHODS: A secondary analysis of the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI2D) trial, which enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease, restricted to participants who underwent CABG with ≥ 1 HbA1c measurement post-CABG, was performed. The index date was date of first post-CABG HbA1c measurement. The primary outcome was MACE (composite of death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, or repeat revascularization). Secondary outcomes included MACE components and heart failure. Cox proportional hazards models treating HbA1c as a time-dependent exposure (reference group: HbA1c 6.1-7.0%) were used to derive hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals adjusting for age, sex and baseline characteristics selected by stepwise regression. RESULTS: A total of 549 patients were followed over a median 3.5 years. The median age of the cohort was 64 years, 25.1% were female, and median baseline HbA1c was 6.7%. Compared to achieving an HbA1c 6.1-7.0%, HbA1c > 8.0% was associated with an increased risk of MACE (HR 1.77, 1.01-3.10). This association was strongest for unstable angina (HR 5.21, 1.03-26.39). Achieving an HbA1c ≤ 6.0% was associated with an increased risk of death (HR 2.41, 1.01-5.74). Other comparisons were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Among patients with type 2 diabetes who underwent CABG, achieving HbA1c 6.1-7.0% was associated with a lower risk of MACE and unstable angina versus achieving an HbA1c > 8.0% and lower risk of death versus achieving an HbA1c ≤ 6.0%.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".