ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2025
Prognostic worth of admission blood glucose to albumin ratio: evaluation in patients following percutaneous coronary intervention with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundRecently, a novel parameter named admission blood glucose to albumin ratio (AAR) has been proposed and proved to be significantly associated with adverse prognosis of acute myocardial infarction. The prognostic utility of AAR for risk stratification in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) treated non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients has not been well established.
methodsThe present study recruited patients admitted for NSTE-ACS who successfully received PCI. The calculation of AAR involved the division of admission blood glucose by serum albumin concentration. The first occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was defined as the primary endpoint. The predictive impact of AAR for MACCE was conducted in subgroups according to whether type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) was combined or not.
resultsA total of 2107 patients (mean age 60.0 ± 9.0 years; 28.0% female) were included in this analysis. The study documented 293 MACCEs (13.9%), distributed as 128 events in the T2DM subgroup and 165 events in the non-T2DM subgroup. AAR exhibited to be a significant risk predictor for MACCE despite following comprehensive adjustment for confounding factors, either analyzed as a nominal or continuous variable (all P < 0.05). AAR demonstrated superior discriminatory ability for MACCE, achieving the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC = 0.667) compared to its individual components. The addition of AAR to a baseline model yielded the greatest enhancement in MACCE risk stratification compared to its constituent measures, as confirmed by a marked improvement in the Harrell's C-index (from 0.641 to 0.683, P < 0.001), along with significant gains in both continuous net reclassification improvement (0.187, P < 0.001) and integrated discrimination improvement (0.027, P < 0.001). Subgroup analyses revealed that the predictive and stratified value of AAR for MACCE was more significant in patients without T2DM.
conclusionAAR serves as a significant independent predictor for risk stratification in PCI-treated NSTE-ACS patients. The predictive and stratified value of AAR for MACCE seems to be more significant in patients without T2DM.
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.