Skip to main content
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart
  • Follow ada on Twitter
  • RSS
  • Visit ada on Facebook
Diabetes Care

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • Diabetes Spectrum
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Diabetes Care
  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Browse
    • By Topic
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • Special Article Collections
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • ADA Peer Review
Cardiovascular and Metabolic Risk

The Prognostic Significance of Diabetes and Microvascular Complications in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction

  1. Pratik B. Sandesara⇑,
  2. Wesley T. O’Neal,
  3. Heval M. Kelli,
  4. Ayman Samman-Tahhan,
  5. Muhammad Hammadah,
  6. Arshed A. Quyyumi and
  7. Laurence S. Sperling
  1. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
  1. Corresponding author: Pratik B. Sandesara, psandes{at}emory.edu.
Diabetes Care 2018 Jan; 41(1): 150-155. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc17-0755
PreviousNext
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Suppl Material
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

OBJECTIVE This study examined the prognostic significance of diabetes and microvascular complications in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This analysis included 3,385 patients (mean age 69 ± 9.6 years; 49% male; 89% white) with HFpEF from the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist Trial (TOPCAT). Diabetes and microvascular complications were ascertained by self-reported history and medical record review. Microvascular complications included neuropathy, nephropathy, and retinopathy. Outcomes included hospitalization, hospitalization for heart failure, death, and cardiovascular death. Cox regression was used to examine the risk of each outcome associated with diabetes and microvascular complications.

RESULTS Of the 1,109 subjects (32%) with diabetes, 352 (32%) had at least one microvascular complication. Patients with diabetes and microvascular complications had an increased risk for hospitalization (no diabetes: referent; diabetes + no microvascular complication: hazard ratio [HR] 1.18, 95% CI 1.01, 1.37; diabetes + microvascular complications: HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.25, 1.89; P-trend <0.001), hospitalization for heart failure (no diabetes: referent; diabetes + no microvascular complication: HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.14, 1.99; diabetes + microvascular complications: HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.38, 2.80; P-trend <0.001), death (no diabetes: referent; diabetes + no microvascular complication: HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.04, 1.75; diabetes + microvascular complications: HR 1.73, 95% CI 1.22, 2.45; P-trend = 0.0017), and cardiovascular death (no diabetes: referent; diabetes + no microvascular complication: HR 1.34, 95% CI 0.96, 1.86; diabetes + microvascular complications: HR 1.70, 95% CI 1.09, 2.65; P-trend = 0.018). When the analysis was limited to participants who reported prior hospitalization for heart failure (n = 2,449), a higher risk of rehospitalization for heart failure was observed across diabetes categories (no diabetes: referent; diabetes + no microvascular complication: HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.01, 1.96; diabetes + microvascular complications: HR 1.78, 95% CI 1.18, 2.70; P-trend = 0.0036).

CONCLUSIONS Diabetes is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes in HFpEF, and the inherent risk of adverse outcomes in HFpEF patients with diabetes varies by the presence of microvascular complications.

Introduction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a growing health care concern with rising prevalence (1). Nearly half of all patients with heart failure symptoms have HFpEF (2). Diabetes is a common comorbid condition that is present in almost half of HFpEF patients, and its presence plays an important role in the development of HFpEF (1). In addition, diabetes confers a nearly twofold increase in morbidity and mortality in patients with HFpEF (3).

Diabetes is associated with various microvascular complications, such as autonomic and peripheral neuropathy, retinopathy, and nephropathy, and these complications are associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes (4). Although diabetes is associated with poor outcomes in HFpEF (5), diabetes is not a uniform disorder, and the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes may vary by disease severity (e.g., presence of microvascular complications). Therefore, we examined the prognostic significance of diabetes and microvascular complications in patients with HFpEF in the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist Trial (TOPCAT).

Research Design and Methods

Study Design and Patients

TOPCAT was a multicenter, international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to examine the efficacy of spironolactone in patients with HFpEF. The design, inclusion criteria, and baseline characteristics of the trial have been published previously (6,7). Briefly, 3,445 patients with symptomatic HFpEF from 270 sites in 6 countries were enrolled between August 2006 and January 2012. The primary goal of the trial was to determine whether spironolactone was associated with a reduction in the composite outcome of cardiovascular mortality, aborted cardiac arrest, or heart failure hospitalization in patients with HFpEF (e.g., documented ejection fraction ≥45%). In this analysis, we examined the relationship between total microvascular disease burden in diabetes and the risk of hospitalization, hospitalization for heart failure, death, and cardiovascular death.

Baseline Characteristics

Patients who participated in TOPCAT underwent a detailed baseline evaluation (7). Age, sex, race, and smoking were obtained by self-reported history. Smoking was defined as the current use of cigarettes. Medical histories for the following diagnoses were obtained by self-report and medical record review: coronary heart disease, stroke, New York Heart Association Functional Classification, and prior heart failure hospitalization. Systolic blood pressure and BMI were obtained by trained staff, and laboratory data included serum creatinine, glomerular filtration rate, hemoglobin, and the urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio. Medication data also were obtained during the initial study visit, and the following were included in this analysis: aspirin, β-blockers, ACE inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers, and statins.

Diabetes and Microvascular Complications

Patients were asked about their diabetes status and characteristics related to diabetes severity during the baseline visit. History of diabetes, duration of diabetes, diabetes medications (insulin vs. noninsulin), and microvascular complications were ascertained by follow-up medical record review. Microvascular complications included neuropathy, nephropathy, and retinopathy.

Outcomes

Outcomes in TOPCAT were adjudicated by a clinical end point committee, and the details of this process and definitions for each outcome examined have been described (6,8). The outcomes examined in this analysis included hospitalization, hospitalization for heart failure, death, and cardiovascular death. Briefly, hospitalization for heart failure was defined as the unexpected presentation to an acute care facility requiring an overnight stay with symptoms and physical examination findings consistent with heart failure and treatment with intravenous vasodilators, inotropes, mechanical fluid removal, or hemodynamic support. Cardiovascular death was defined as death caused by one of the following: myocardial infarction, worsening heart failure, sudden death, stroke, pulmonary embolism, death occurring during a cardiovascular-related procedure, or other cardiovascular death. Death included the composite of cardiovascular and noncardiovascular death.

Statistical Analysis

Diabetes was categorized as 1) no diabetes, 2) diabetes + no microvascular complication, or 3) diabetes + microvascular complications. Baseline characteristics were compared across these categories. Categorical variables were reported as frequency and percentage, and continuous variables were reported as mean ± SD. Characteristics were compared between all groups using the χ2 method for categorical data and the ANOVA procedure for continuous variables. Comparisons were also made between diabetes + no microvascular complication and diabetes + microvascular complications using the χ2 method and Student t test. Follow-up time was defined as the time from randomization until one of the following: outcome of interest, death, loss to follow-up, or end of follow-up. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to examine the unadjusted cumulative incidence estimates of each outcome associated with diabetes and microvascular complications. Cox regression was used to examine the risk of each outcome associated with each diabetes category (referent: no diabetes).

Multivariable models were constructed as follows: model 1, adjusted for age, sex, and race; model 2, adjusted for model 1 covariates plus smoking, systolic blood pressure, serum creatinine, BMI, aspirin, ACE inhibitors/angiotensin II receptor blockers, β-blockers, statin, randomization group, New York Heart Association Functional Classification, coronary heart disease, stroke, prior heart failure hospitalization, insulin, duration of diabetes, and hemoglobin; and model 3, adjusted for model 2 covariates plus the urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio.

A secondary analysis was performed in which we limited patients to those who reported prior heart failure hospitalization to determine whether the magnitude of the association between diabetes and each outcome was dependent on prior admission. Also, to determine whether the risk of adverse events increased incrementally with the number of microvascular complications, we performed an analysis limited to patients with diabetes (n = 1,109) across the following categories: 1) no microvascular complications (referent); 2) one microvascular complication; 3) two or more microvascular complications. In addition, as a result of the differences in the baseline characteristics and event rates observed between patients recruited in Russia and Georgia versus the Americas (9), we examined whether the association of diabetes and its microvascular complications with outcomes varied by region of enrollment (Russia/Georgia vs. the Americas). Statistical significance was defined as P < 0.05. SAS 9.4 software (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) was used for all analyses.

Results

This analysis included 3,385 patients (mean age 69 ± 9.6 years; 49% male; 89% white). A total of 1,109 (32%) had diabetes, and 352 (32%) had at least one microvascular complication. Of these patients with diabetes, neuropathy was present in 232 (21%), nephropathy in 120 (11%), and retinopathy in 167 (15%). The baseline characteristics across diabetes categories are reported in Table 1.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1

Baseline characteristics (N = 3,385)

During a median follow-up of 3.4 years (25%, 75% = 2.0, 4.9), a total of 1,524 hospitalizations, 437 hospitalizations for heart failure, 516 deaths, and 330 cardiovascular deaths occurred. The cumulative incidence estimates for hospitalization, hospitalization for heart failure, death, and cardiovascular death by diabetes status are depicted in Figs. 1 and 2. An increased risk for hospitalization (P-trend <0.001), hospitalization for heart failure (P-trend <0.001), death (P-trend = 0.0017), and cardiovascular death (P-trend = 0.018) was observed across categories of diabetes and microvascular complications (Table 2).

Figure 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1

Unadjusted cumulative incidence curves are shown for hospitalization (A) (log-rank P < 0.001) and hospitalization for heart failure (B) (log-rank P < 0.001).

Figure 2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2

Unadjusted cumulative incidence curves are shown for death (A) (log-rank P < 0.001) and cardiovascular death (B) (log-rank P < 0.001).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2

Risk of hospitalization and death with diabetes (N = 3,385)

When the analysis was limited to participants who reported prior hospitalization for heart failure (n = 2,449), a higher risk of rehospitalization for heart failure was observed in patients with diabetes + microvascular complications than in those with diabetes + no microvascular complication (no diabetes: referent; diabetes + no microvascular complication: hazard ratio [HR] 1.40, 95% CI 1.01, 1.96; diabetes + microvascular complications: HR 1.78, 95% CI 1.18, 2.70; P-trend = 0.0036). In a secondary analysis limited to persons with diabetes, a higher risk of hospitalization (P-trend <0.001), hospitalization for heart failure (P-trend = 0.0063), and death (P-trend = 0.037) was observed with a higher number of microvascular complications (Supplementary Table 1). The risk of cardiovascular death did not increase with a higher number of microvascular complications (P-trend = 0.45). When we examined the association between diabetes and each outcome by country of origin (Russia/Georgia vs. the Americas), similar findings were observed in the patients from Russia/Georgia compared with the Americas (data not shown).

Conclusions

This analysis from TOPCAT found diabetes was associated with an increased risk for hospitalization, hospitalization for heart failure, death, and cardiovascular death in patients with HFpEF, and the risk for these adverse events was greater among patients with diabetes who had known microvascular complications. Overall, our findings provide evidence that diabetes represents an important comorbid condition in HFpEF with regard to prognosis and utilization of health care resources and that the inherent risk of adverse outcomes in HFpEF patients with diabetes varies by the presence of microvascular complications.

Several secondary analyses of clinical trial data have demonstrated that the presence of diabetes is associated with adverse outcomes in HFpEF. In a post hoc analysis from the Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity (CHARM) study, diabetes was associated with a twofold increased risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (10). Similarly, in the Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction Trial (I-PRESERVE) study, patients with diabetes had a 1.75-fold increased risk of cardiovascular death or heart failure hospitalization (5). The findings in this analysis demonstrated that the risk of adverse events increased linearly with the number of microvascular complications. These data enhance our understanding of the adverse risk profile among individuals with diabetes who have HFpEF, as we have shown that microvascular complications have important prognostic information in this group. Furthermore, we have demonstrated that microvascular complications represent an important marker for heart failure rehospitalization, a finding that has not been previously reported.

The mechanisms that link diabetes and the presence of microvascular complications with adverse events in patients with HFpEF are unknown. Microvascular disease results from significant hyperglycemia in tissues where glucose uptake occurs independently of insulin. Subsequently, tissue damage occurs as a result of glucose-mediated damage, oxidative stress, and advanced glycation end products (11). Hyperglycemia also leads to the development of atherosclerosis through endothelial dysfunction and promotion of elevated blood cholesterol. Subclinical myocardial damage is often present in patients with diabetes without clinically apparent manifestations (12,13). Therefore, microvascular complications signify that subclinical cardiovascular disease is present and that future events will likely develop (4). This is supported by the findings of this analysis, because an increased risk of death from cardiovascular causes was observed in patients with diabetes and microvascular complications.

The observed findings also possibly were related to diabetes medications that are associated with an increased risk of heart failure events. Saxagliptin and rosiglitazone have both been associated with an increased risk for hospitalization for heart failure (14,15), and the increased risk for heart failure–specific outcomes was possibly related to medications or therapies received by patients in this study. However, we were unable to account for individual diabetes medications and their effect on adverse events in this study because TOPCAT did not ascertain the specific oral agents. Nonetheless, our data demonstrate an important finding regarding the risk of adverse outcomes in HFpEF patients with diabetes, and further investigation is needed to elucidate the underlying pathophysiologic link.

The coexistence of diabetes and HFpEF portends an increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Accordingly, optimizing medical and lifestyle therapies for both conditions, while balancing the potential for adverse effects of medications, is important. Although specific recommendations do not exist regarding the management of HFpEF patients who have diabetes and microvascular complications (16), our data suggest that careful attention is needed in this heart failure population. Possibly, more frequent clinic visits or frequent monitoring of volume status is needed in HFpEF patients with diabetic microvascular complications to reduce acute decompensation and heart failure–specific outcomes. In addition, as a result of the increased risk of cardiovascular death, HFpEF patients with diabetic microvascular complications possibly merit closer evaluation if symptoms suggest underlying coronary heart disease. Although the findings of this analysis support this claim, further research is needed to determine the optimal management strategies of patients in this high-risk group before changes in clinical practice are made.

Several limitations merit attention in our analysis. Several baseline characteristics were self-reported and subjected our analysis to recall bias. Diabetes and the presence of microvascular complications were ascertained by self-reported history and review of relevant of medical records. Despite rigorous attempts to identify all patients with diabetes, it is possible that some were missed. However, the potential for misclassification of patients with diabetes did not likely result in significant bias other than reducing effect estimates toward the null. Rigorous attempts were also made to ascertain all adverse events in TOPCAT, but it is possible that events were missed. Furthermore, we included several characteristics in our multivariable models in an attempt to account for diabetes severity, yet other markers, such as hemoglobin A1c, were not collected, and we acknowledge that these factors possibly introduced residual confounding into our analysis.

In conclusion, we have demonstrated that diabetes and its microvascular complications have important prognostic information regarding adverse outcomes in HFpEF. In addition, microvascular disease burden predicts heart failure rehospitalization in this high-risk group. Further investigation is needed to develop preventive strategies to reduce the morbidity and mortality in these high-risk patients and to determine optimal treatment strategies to improve outcomes in HFpEF patients with diabetes.

Article Information

Acknowledgments. This manuscript was prepared using TOPCAT research materials obtained from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center and does not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of the TOPCAT Study or the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Funding. P.B.S. is supported by the Abraham J. & Phyllis Katz Foundation (Atlanta, GA). W.T.O. is supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award number F32-HL-134290.

Duality of Interest. No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.

Author Contributions. P.B.S. and W.T.O. were involved with the study design, statistics, interpretation of data, and drafting and critical revision of the manuscript. H.M.K., A.S.-T., M.H., A.A.Q., and L.S.S. were involved with the study design, interpretation of data, and drafting and critical revision of the manuscript. P.B.S. and W.T.O. are the guarantors of this work and, as such, had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Footnotes

  • This article contains Supplementary Data online at http://care.diabetesjournals.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.2337/dc17-0755/-/DC1.

  • This article is featured in a podcast available at http://www.diabetesjournals.org/content/diabetes-core-update-podcasts.

  • See accompanying articles, pp. 11, 14, 136, 143, and 156.

  • Received April 13, 2017.
  • Accepted September 20, 2017.
  • © 2017 by the American Diabetes Association.
http://www.diabetesjournals.org/content/license

Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. More information is available at http://www.diabetesjournals.org/content/license.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Mentz RJ,
    2. Kelly JP,
    3. von Lueder TG, et al
    . Noncardiac comorbidities in heart failure with reduced versus preserved ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014;64:2281–2293pmid:25456761
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Sharma K,
    2. Kass DA
    . Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: mechanisms, clinical features, and therapies. Circ Res 2014;115:79–96pmid:24951759
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Samson R,
    2. Jaiswal A,
    3. Ennezat PV,
    4. Cassidy M,
    5. Le Jemtel TH
    . Clinical phenotypes in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. J Am Heart Assoc 2016;5:e002477pmid:26811159
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Brownrigg JR,
    2. Hughes CO,
    3. Burleigh D, et al
    . Microvascular disease and risk of cardiovascular events among individuals with type 2 diabetes: a population-level cohort study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2016;4:588–597pmid:27216886
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Kristensen SL,
    2. Mogensen UM,
    3. Jhund PS, et al
    . Clinical and echocardiographic characteristics and cardiovascular outcomes according to diabetes status in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: a report from the Irbesartan in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction Trial (I-Preserve). Circulation 2017;135:724–735pmid:28052977
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    Desai AS, Lewis EF, Li R, et al. Rationale and design of the treatment of preserved cardiac function heart failure with an aldosterone antagonist trial: a randomized, controlled study of spironolactone in patients with symptomatic heart failure and preserved ejection fraction. Am Heart J 2011;162:966–972. e910
  7. ↵
    1. Shah SJ,
    2. Heitner JF,
    3. Sweitzer NK, et al
    . Baseline characteristics of patients in the treatment of preserved cardiac function heart failure with an aldosterone antagonist trial. Circ Heart Fail 2013;6:184–192pmid:23258572
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Pitt B,
    2. Pfeffer MA,
    3. Assmann SF, et al.; TOPCAT Investigators
    . Spironolactone for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. N Engl J Med 2014;370:1383–1392pmid:24716680
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. ↵
    1. Pfeffer MA,
    2. Claggett B,
    3. Assmann SF, et al
    . Regional variation in patients and outcomes in the Treatment of Preserved Cardiac Function Heart Failure With an Aldosterone Antagonist (TOPCAT) trial. Circulation 2015;131:34–42pmid:25406305
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    1. MacDonald MR,
    2. Petrie MC,
    3. Varyani F, et al.; CHARM Investigators
    . Impact of diabetes on outcomes in patients with low and preserved ejection fraction heart failure: an analysis of the Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity (CHARM) programme. Eur Heart J 2008;29:1377–1385pmid:18413309
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  11. ↵
    1. Brownlee M
    . Biochemistry and molecular cell biology of diabetic complications. Nature 2001;414:813–820pmid:11742414
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  12. ↵
    1. MacDonald MR,
    2. Petrie MC,
    3. Home PD, et al
    . Incidence and prevalence of unrecognized myocardial infarction in people with diabetes: a substudy of the Rosiglitazone Evaluated for Cardiac Outcomes and Regulation of Glycemia in Diabetes (RECORD) study. Diabetes Care 2011;34:1394–1396pmid:21562320
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    1. Davis TM,
    2. Coleman RL,
    3. Holman RR; UKPDS Group
    . Prognostic significance of silent myocardial infarction in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus: United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) 79. Circulation 2013;127:980–987pmid:23362315
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Scirica BM,
    2. Bhatt DL,
    3. Braunwald E, et al.; SAVOR-TIMI 53 Steering Committee and Investigators
    . Saxagliptin and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 2013;369:1317–1326pmid:23992601
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  15. ↵
    1. Komajda M,
    2. McMurray JJ,
    3. Beck-Nielsen H, et al
    . Heart failure events with rosiglitazone in type 2 diabetes: data from the RECORD clinical trial. Eur Heart J 2010;31:824–831pmid:20118174
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Yancy CW,
    2. Jessup M,
    3. Bozkurt B, et al.; American College of Cardiology Foundation; American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines
    . 2013 ACCF/AHA guideline for the management of heart failure: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013;62:e147–e239pmid:23747642
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Diabetes Care: 41 (1)

In this Issue

January 2018, 41(1)
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by Author
  • Masthead (PDF)
Sign up to receive current issue alerts
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about Diabetes Care.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Prognostic Significance of Diabetes and Microvascular Complications in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Diabetes Care
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Diabetes Care web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The Prognostic Significance of Diabetes and Microvascular Complications in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Pratik B. Sandesara, Wesley T. O’Neal, Heval M. Kelli, Ayman Samman-Tahhan, Muhammad Hammadah, Arshed A. Quyyumi, Laurence S. Sperling
Diabetes Care Jan 2018, 41 (1) 150-155; DOI: 10.2337/dc17-0755

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Add to Selected Citations
Share

The Prognostic Significance of Diabetes and Microvascular Complications in Patients With Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Pratik B. Sandesara, Wesley T. O’Neal, Heval M. Kelli, Ayman Samman-Tahhan, Muhammad Hammadah, Arshed A. Quyyumi, Laurence S. Sperling
Diabetes Care Jan 2018, 41 (1) 150-155; DOI: 10.2337/dc17-0755
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Research Design and Methods
    • Results
    • Conclusions
    • Article Information
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Suppl Material
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Differences in Physiological Responses to Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing in Adults With and Without Type 1 Diabetes: A Pooled Analysis
  • Sedentary Time and Metabolic Risk in Extremely Active Older Adults
  • Insulin-Like Growth Factor Binding Protein 7 Predicts Renal and Cardiovascular Outcomes in the Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study
Show more Cardiovascular and Metabolic Risk

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Standards of Care Guidelines
  • Online Ahead of Print
  • Archives
  • Submit
  • Subscribe
  • Email Alerts
  • RSS Feeds

More Information

  • About the Journal
  • Instructions for Authors
  • Journal Policies
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Advertising
  • Privacy Policy: ADA Journals
  • Copyright Notice/Public Access Policy
  • Contact Us

Other ADA Resources

  • Diabetes
  • Clinical Diabetes
  • Diabetes Spectrum
  • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
  • BMJ Open - Diabetes Research & Care
  • Professional Books
  • Diabetes Forecast

 

  • DiabetesJournals.org
  • Diabetes Core Update
  • ADA's DiabetesPro
  • ADA Member Directory
  • Diabetes.org

© 2021 by the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care Print ISSN: 0149-5992, Online ISSN: 1935-5548.