HFPEF AND GLYCEMIC VARIABILITY: GHIDD TRIAL

Abstract

Abstract Background Recently the guidelines of European Association of Preventive Cardiology reported that the prevalence of diabetes mellitus in patients with diastolic heart failure (HFpEF) is around 31%. Purpose In our study we evaluated the non diabetic patients with HFpEF with Glunovo® to evaluate the glycaemic variability in this population. Methods 100 patients with HFpEF admitted to cardiology units of 4 Italian centres on the major islands were enrolled consecutively. Glunovo® was applied to each enrolled patient for 7 days, At the end of the glycaemic monitoring were calculated for each patient the glycaemic variability and the incidence of hyperglycaemia and hypoglycaemia. Glycaemic variability refers to a blood glucose value of ≥ 200 mg / dL or ≤ 59 mg / dL detected more than 3 times in a day for at least 4 days. Overall, 43 males and 57 females were enrolled with a mean age of 69.3 years (39–87 years). All patients underwent a timely glucose measurement at admission which excluded the presence of hyperglycaemia. No potentially hyperglycaemic drugs were added to the treatment during the hospital stay. Results In 94 of the 100 patients enrolled it was possible to conclude the analysis, detecting the glycaemic variability, the point glycaemia values and the estimated glycated haemoglobin value. A glycaemia ≥200 mg/dL was found in 53 patients (56%) while a high glycaemic variability was found in 51 patients (54%). A blood glucose value <59 mg / dl was found in 48 patients (51%). Only 5 times the estimated glycated Hb values were> 7%. 32 of the patients who had at least 3 punctual glucose values ≥200 mg/dL were prescribed an oral glucose load curve, which in 100% of cases confirmed the diagnosis of diabetes.No statistically significant differences were found based on age group or sex. In the control group, consisting of 10 patients without DHF undergoing continuous glucose monitoring at one of the participating cardiology units, an unknown hyperglycaemia was found in only 1 patient (10%) and a glycaemic variability in only 1 patient (10%). Conclusions Our experience suggests an incidence of hyperglycaemia and glycaemic variability more then 65% in patients affected by HFpEF. If our data were reproducible on a large scale, a so high prevalence of diabetes in patients with HFpEF cold explain the efficacy of SGLT–2 inhibitor and GLP–1 Agonist in this class of patients.