Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 23, 2025

Hydra, a Computer-Based Platform for Aiding Clinicians in Cardiovascular Analysis and Diagnosis
Published on: September 26, 2018
Baseline Cardiovascular Risk Factor Control in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Coronary Disease Versus Stroke:
Priyadarshini Balasubramanian1, Walter N Kernan2, Kevin N Sheth3
1Section of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine (P.B.), Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
Insights
Patients with type 2 diabetes and stroke have poorer cardiovascular risk factor control than those with coronary artery disease. This highlights a need for improved secondary prevention strategies in stroke patients.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Endocrinology
- Public Health
Background:
- Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and cardiovascular disease face heightened risks of recurrent ischemic events.
- Effective cardiovascular risk factor control is crucial for secondary prevention in these individuals.
- Understanding risk factor control disparities among T2D patients with different macrovascular complications, specifically stroke versus coronary artery disease (CAD), remains unclear.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate potential differences in cardiovascular risk factor control between T2D patients with a history of stroke and those with CAD.
- To analyze risk factor control in T2D patients with both stroke and CAD compared to those with stroke alone.
Main Methods:
- Cross-sectional analysis of 12,856 T2D patients from three major cardiovascular outcome trials (CARMELINA, EMPA-REG OUTCOME, CAROLINA).
- Assessment of baseline risk factors: dyslipidemia, hypertension, smoking, and antiplatelet/anticoagulant therapy.
- Logistic regression models were used to analyze the odds of achieving optimal control (3-4 controlled factors) versus suboptimal control (0-2 factors).
Main Results:
- Patients with CAD alone demonstrated significantly better cardiovascular risk factor control compared to patients with stroke alone across all three trials.
- The odds ratios for good versus suboptimal control were consistently higher for CAD patients (e.g., CARMELINA: 2.05 [1.67-2.51]).
- When comparing patients with both CAD and stroke to those with stroke alone, the differences in risk factor control were less pronounced and not significant in the CAROLINA trial.
Conclusions:
- A notable discordance exists in cardiovascular risk factor control among T2D patients, with stroke patients exhibiting less optimal control than CAD patients.
- The intermediate results for patients with both conditions suggest that clinician-related factors may contribute to these control disparities.
- These findings underscore the importance of targeted interventions to improve secondary prevention in T2D patients with cerebrovascular complications.
Background:
Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and cardiovascular disease are at increased risk for recurrent ischemic events. Cardiovascular risk factor control is vital for secondary prevention, but how this compares among individuals with different T2D macrovascular complications is unknown. We aimed to determine if there might be differences in risk factor control in patients with T2D with previous stroke versus coronary artery disease (CAD).
Methods:
Cross-sectional analyses were performed on 12 856 patients with T2D with prior history of stroke with or without CAD from 3 diabetes cardiovascular outcome trials: CARMELINA (The Cardiovascular and Renal Microvascular Outcome Study With Linagliptin), EMPA-REG OUTCOME (Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients), and CAROLINA (The Cardiovascular Outcome Study of Linagliptin vs Glimepiride in Type 2 Diabetes). Risk factors at baseline assessed included dyslipidemia, hypertension, smoking, and current antiplatelet/anticoagulant therapy. Control, respectively, was defined as LDL (low-density lipoprotein)-C <100 mg/dL or statin use, systolic blood pressure <140 and diastolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg, not currently smoking, and use of an antiplatelet/anticoagulant medication. The odds ratio of 3 to 4 (or good) versus 0 to 2 (or suboptimal) risk factors controlled was analyzed by logistic regression models.
Results:
The odds for good versus suboptimal risk factor control in patients with CAD alone was higher than in those with stroke alone across all 3 trials odds ratios (95% CI): CARMELINA, 2.05 (1.67-2.51), EMPA-REG OUTCOME, 2.50 (2.10-2.99), and CAROLINA, 1.63 (1.21-2.20). The respective odds ratios were lower (and rendered nonsignificant in CAROLINA) when cardiovascular risk factor control in patients with both CAD and stroke were compared with those with stroke alone: CARMELINA, 1.45 (1.13-1.87); EMPA-REG OUTCOME, 1.62 (1.25-2.08); and CAROLINA, 1.16 (0.74-1.83).
Conclusions:
In contemporary populations of patients with T2D, there was significant discordance in control of cardiovascular risk factors between patients with stroke versus CAD, with the former having less optimal control. The intermediate results in patients with both CAD and stroke suggest that these differences could be related at least in part to clinician factors.
Registration:
URL: https://www.
Clinicaltrials:
gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01243424, NCT01131676, NCT01897532.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Coronary Artery Disease IV: Preventive Measures
Coronary Artery Disease I: Introduction
Diabetes Mellitus: Type 2 and Gestational
Diabetes: Management and Pharmacotherapy
Insulin remains the cornerstone of treatment for most patients with type 1 and many...
Atherosclerosis III: Management
Coronary Artery Disease V: Interprofessional Care

