ReviewThe Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism2012
Clinical review: Screening for coronary artery disease in type 2 diabetes.
Review in The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cilostazol treatment for preventing adverse cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes and coronary atherosclerosis: Long-term follow-up of the ESCAPE study.Journal of diabetes · 2022Trial
- Cardiac magnetic resonance for asymptomatic patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular high risk (CATCH): a pilot study.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2020Observational
- Subclinical atherosclerosis burden predicts cardiovascular events in individuals with diabetes and chronic kidney disease.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2019Observational
- Ambulatory 24-h ECG monitoring and cardiovascular autonomic assessment for the screening of silent myocardial ischemia in elderly type 2 diabetic hypertensive patients.Heart and vessels · 2017Observational
- Low-dose CT coronary angiography for assessment of coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes--a cross-sectional study.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2015Article
- Review
- Review
- Plasma metabonomics study on Chinese medicine syndrome evolution of heart failure rats caused by LAD ligation.BMC complementary and alternative medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
clinical contextSensitive tools are available to diagnose occult ischemic and atherosclerotic coronary disease, yet screening for coronary artery disease (CAD) has not been shown to reduce cardiac events in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Professional guidelines are inconsistent regarding CAD screening recommendations, but it is suggested that those at highest risk (10-yr risk ≥20%) for cardiac events may benefit. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We reviewed bibliographies of professional CAD screening guidelines, review articles, and clinical trials published within the last 10 yr, although we have included relevant older studies. We excluded studies that did not focus on T2DM or explicitly analyze that subgroup. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Although screening for coronary ischemia or atherosclerosis does provide incremental prognostic information in patients with T2DM and previously undiagnosed CAD, this has not been found to significantly impact outcomes. This appears to result from comparable efficacy of revascularization and optimal medical therapy in stable CAD. Limited evidence supports the hypothesis that those with more severe CAD (three-vessel, left main, proximal left anterior descending) amenable to bypass surgery may be potential beneficiaries of screening. However, the low prevalence of such candidates in the asymptomatic population, continuing advances with percutaneous intervention, and the lack of prospective trials makes such a recommendation currently unsupportable.
conclusionsFindings to date do not support widespread screening for CAD in patients with T2DM. A future strategy identifying those at highest risk as screening candidates may ultimately be effective, but the optimal method for selecting those subjects or subsequent treatment is unknown.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.