الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 204 |  |  |
| | | from | 204 | | |
Abstract
Introduction: The prevention of CAD and reduction of associated morbidity and mortality constitute great public health challenges worldwide. Diabetic compared with non-diabetic patients is a four- to six-fold increased risk of cardiovascular events. Women with diabetes lose their gender protection against CAD. Risk of subsequent MI among diabetic patients without previous MI as in non-diabetic patients with a history of prior MI. Therefore, DM is considered as a risk equivalent to CAD. About 20–30% of patients presenting with ACS have diabetes and near 25% of patients undergoing PCI suffer from diabetes. Morbidity and mortality related to CAD remain a great challenge in patients with DM. Revascularization of CAD is an important therapeutic intervention owing to its impact on both symptoms and prognosis. The optimal revascularization strategy continues to evolve due to the advent of new technologies and improved peri-procedural outcome with both PCI and CABG. The revascularization strategy in patients with DM is influenced by several factors, including the clinical setting (acute STEMI and cardiogenic shock, NSTEMI or stable angina pectoris), coronary anatomy (extent of coronary disease, suitability for CABG anastomoses, previous CABG), and LV function. The long-term risk of death, MI, and repeat revascularization remains nearly twice as high in diabetic patients than in non-diabetic patients undergoing PCI. Clinical outcome of diabetic patients undergoing PCI is inferior to that of non-diabetic patients. Several aspects of diabetic CAD appear responsible for this observation. Vessel size has been reported to be smaller in diabetic compared with non-diabetic patients. Diabetes has also shown to be associated with higher rates of restenosis in the balloon-angioplasty, BMS, and DES era. PCI with BMS in diabetic patients is associated with higher rates of repeat revascularization than CABG. Compared with BMS, DES have significantly reduced the risk of restenosis following PCI in diabetic patients; however, repeat revascularization procedures remain more common after DES than CABG in diabetic patients. Aim of work: To Review the recent literatures and researches concerning CAD in diabetic patient to identify the different therapeutic options, their results, complications and limitations, and the advance in coronary intervention in these patients. Conclusions: The best coronary revascularization of diabetic patients depends on the clinical setting and anatomical factors.