الفهرس 
Diabetes and Coronary Artery DiseaseOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 154 |  |  |
| | | from | 154 | | |
Abstract
Atherosclerosis is a multifactorial disease with dyslipidemia, dysglycemia, smoking, and many other causes of endothelial injury, as well as certain genetic predispositions, all contributing to
the pathogenesis of this syndrome [(Libby P. 2003) & (Ross R. 1999)].
Although the relationship between cardiovascular disease and glycemia is believed to represent a continuum without a threshold effect, HbA1C might offer more advantages in terms of prognostic information, as it is a more stable, accurate parameter of glucose homeostasis. Several large scale studies have shown the relationship between HbA1C and the rate of long-term microvascular complications in diabetic patients [(Verdoia M, et al. 2014)]. Dyslipidemia is one of the primary causes for coronary artery disease (CAD). Elevated total cholesterol (TC), triglycerides (TG), low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) and lowered high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) are conventional risk factors in myocardial infarction patients [(Adak M and Shivapuri JN. 2010)].
Our study included 100 patients who have type 2 diabetes mellitus and suffered from true anginal pain and underwent coronary multislice computed tomographic angiogram to study the correlation between the extent of coronary atherosclerosis with the glycaemic control and lipid profile.
Our study result showed statistically insignificant difference between study groups as regard age, gender and risk factors except for age and dyslipidemia. Age showed a statistical significant difference between patients with total CCS >10 and those with scores
≤ 10 but didn’t show statistical significant difference between patients with and without significant stenosis. While dyslipidemia showed a statistical significant difference at both levels of comparison (i.e. below and above total CCS of 10 as well as with and without significant stenosis).
Also on comparing study groups regarding LVEDD, LVESD and EF, there’s was no statistical significant difference at both levels of comparison.
Concerning number and type of vessels affected, all parameters of comparison showed a statistically significant difference except for distribution of single vessel disease at both levels of comparison and incidence of LM involvement between patients with and without significant stenosis.
On comparative and correlation analyses of study laboratory parameters, we found that there was a statistically significant difference between study groups at both levels of comparison regarding total cholesterol, LDL-C, HDL-C, triglyceride and HbA1C levels. Also these parameters showed a highly statistically significant correlations with total CCS.
Additionally, the latter five mentioned parameters showed effective cut off values on ROC curve analysis for total CCS below and above 400 as the output of concern.