ArticleThrombosis journal2025
Prognostic significance of stress hyperglycemia ratio in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and acute coronary syndromes.
Article in Thrombosis journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Stress hyperglycemia ratio in coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of severity and prognosis.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2026Pooled it
- U-shaped association of the stress hyperglycemia ratio with all-cause mortality and premature death in patients with cardiovascular disease: a cohort study.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2025Article
- Stress Hyperglycemia Ratio as a Predictor of In-Hospital Stent Thrombosis in STEMI Patients Undergoing Primary PCI: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Prognostic significance of stress hyperglycemia ratio in acute coronary syndrome patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrognostic significance of stress hyperglycemia ratio (SHR) has not been well studied in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS).
methodsWe prospectively measured admission fasting blood glucose (AFBG) and glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and retrospectively calculated the stress hyperglycemia ratio (SHR, = AFBG/[1.59 × HbA1c (%) - 2.59]) in 791 patients with T2DM and ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The primary endpoint was defined as major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), including all-cause mortality, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and unplanned repeat coronary revascularization.
resultsThe mean age of the study population was 61 ± 10 years, and 72.8% were male. Over a median follow-up of 927 days, 194 patients developed at least one primary endpoint event. The follow-up incidence of MACCE increased in parallel with SHR tertiles (15.6%, 21.9%, and 36.1%, respectively; P for trend < 0.001). The Cox proportional hazards regression analysis adjusted for multiple confounding factors showed hazard ratios for MACCE of 1.525 (95% CI: 1.009-2.305; P = 0.045) for the middle tertile and 2.525 (95% CI: 1.729-3.687; P < 0.001) for the highest tertile of SHR, with the lowest tertile as the reference. The addition of SHR to the baseline reference prediction model improved model predictive performance markedly (C-statistic: increased from 0.704 to 0.721; cNRI: 0.176 [95% CI: 0.063-0.282], P = 0.002; IDI: 0.030 [95% CI: 0.009-0.063], P = 0.002).
conclusionSHR was independently and significantly associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes in T2DM and ACS patients who underwent PCI, and had an incremental effect on the predictive ability of the baseline reference prediction model.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.