Impact of diabetes mellitus on immature platelet fraction and its association with coronary artery disease. Issue 4 (5th February 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Verdoia, Monica; Nardin, Matteo; Rolla, Roberta; Pergolini, Patrizia; Suryapranata, Harry; Kedhi, Elvin; Carriero, Alessandro; De Luca, Giuseppe
• Is Part Of: Diabetes/metabolism research and reviews. Volume 36:Issue 4(2020)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2020-02-05
• Subjects: coronary artery disease -- coronary angiography -- diabetes mellitus -- immature platelet fraction; Diabetes -- Periodicals; Metabolism -- Periodicals; 616.642
• DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.3290
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1520-7552

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Higher prothrombotic status and alterations in platelet function and thrombopoiesis are associated with diabetes mellitus (DM). We assessed the impact of diabetes and glucose control on the immature platelet fraction (IPF) and their relationship with prevalence and extent of coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing coronary angiography were included. Significant CAD was defined as at least one vessel stenosis greater than 50%. IPF levels were measured at admission by routine blood cells count (A Sysmex XE‐2100). Results: We included 1781 patients, of whom 660 (37.1%) suffered from diabetes. Diabetes was associated with advanced age and a higher cardiovascular risk profile. No difference in the mean values of IPF were observed between patients with or without DM (3.6 ± 2.5 vs 3.5 ± 2.5, P = 0.39) and neither in the rate of patients with IPF above the median (2.9%) (51.6% vs 50.6%, P = 0.73). In patients with DM, the IPF levels did not relate with glucose control parameters (glycaemia: r = −0.024, P = 0.54, glycosylated haemoglobin: r = 0.11, P = 0.72). The prevalence of CAD was significantly lower in patients with DM and IPF greater than the median (80.5% vs 86.5%, P = 0.04, adjusted odds ratio [OR] [95% confidence interval {CI}] = 0.57[0.36–0.91], P = 0.02), while not left main/three‐vessel CAD (36.9% vs 38.2%, P = 0.75, adjusted OR [95%CI] = 0.91[0.64–1.28], P = 0.90). Conclusion: In the present study, neither DM nor glucose control are independent predictors of IPF above the median. In patients with DM, higher IPF levels were associated with a lower prevalence of CAD and with a similar extent of severe CAD and angiographic findings. Therefore, until new data become available, elevated IPF should not be systematically applied on a large scale as cardiovascular risk marker in patients with diabetes.