The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Diabetes and Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery
Abstract
OBJECTIVE—To determine the adequacy of perioperative glycemic control in diabetic patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and to explore the association between glycemic control and in-hospital morbidity/mortality. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients with diabetes undergoing CABG between April 2000 and March 2001 who survived at least 24 h postoperatively. RESULTS—Of the 291 patients in this study, 95% had type 2 diabetes and 40% had retinopathy, nephropathy, or neuropathy at baseline. During hospitalization (median 7 days), 78 (27%) of these patients suffered a nonfatal stroke or myocardial infarction, septic complication, or died (“adverse outcomes”). Glycemic control was suboptimal (average glucose on first postoperative day was 11.4 [11.2–11.6] mmol/l) and was significantly associated with adverse outcomes post-CABG (P = 0.03). Patients whose average glucose level was in the highest quartile on postoperative day 1 had higher risk of adverse outcomes after the first postoperative day than those with glucose in the lowest quartile (odds ratio 2.5 [1.1–5.3]). Even after adjustment for other clinical and operative factors, average blood glucose level on the first postoperative day remained significantly associated with subsequent adverse outcomes: for each 1-mmol/l increase above 6.1 mmol/l, risk increased by 17%. CONCLUSIONS—Perioperative glycemic control in our cohort of diabetic patients undergoing CABG in a tertiary care facility was suboptimal. We believe closure of this care gap is imperative, because hyperglycemia in the first postoperative day was associated with subsequent adverse outcomes in our study patients.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Capes, S. E., Hunt, D., Malmberg, K., & Gerstein, H. C. (2000) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(99)08415-9 · Cited by 2,187
Cited by
Umpierrez, G. E., Hellman, R., Korytkowski, M. T., Kosiborod, M., Maynard, G. A., Montori, V. M., Seley, J. J., & Van den Berghe, G. (2012) · The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism · doi:10.1210/jc.2011-2098 · Cited by 1,126
(2007) · Endocrine Practice · doi:10.4158/ep.13.s1.1 · Cited by 699
Kwon, S., Thompson, R., Dellinger, P., Yanez, D., Farrohki, E., & Flum, D. (2013) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e31827b6bbc · Cited by 598
Fleisher, L. A., Beckman, J. A., Brown, K. A., Calkins, H., Chaikof, E. L., Fleischmann, K. E., Freeman, W. K., Froehlich, J. B., Kasper, E. K., Kersten, J. R., et al. (2007) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.107.185699 · Cited by 587
Marchant, M. H., Viens, N. A., Cook, C., Vail, T. P., & Bolognesi, M. P. (2009) · The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery-American Volume · doi:10.2106/jbjs.h.00116 · Cited by 561
Metadata
- Authors
- McAlister, F. A., Man, J., Bistritz, L., Amad, H., & Tandon, P.
- Venue
- Diabetes Care
- Publisher
- American Diabetes Association
- Published
- 2003-05-01
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1518-1524
- ISSN
- 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
- 1935-5548
- OpenAlex
- W2097716426
- Cited by
- 271
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Diabetes and Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2337/diacare.26.5.1518
- The paper
- McAlister, F. A., Man, J., Bistritz, L., Amad, H., & Tandon, P. (2003). Diabetes and Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery. Diabetes Care. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.26.5.1518
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.