Lightguide spectrophotometry is an easy, noninvasive, and reliable method for simultaneous measurement of superficial microvascular blood flow by laser Doppler fluxmetry and skin oxygenation by spectrophotometry. Further studies are required to clarify the validity of these measures in special patient populations such as diabetes mellitus with specified microvascular complications.

Aim:Postprandial release of intact proinsulin (IP) is an independent marker for β-cell dysfunction in patients with type 2 diabetes. This open-label, parallel-group, two-arm, pilot study compared the β-cell protective effect of adding insulin glargine (GLA) vs. NPH insulin to ongoing metformin.Material and methods:Overall, 28 insulin-naive type 2 diabetes subjects (mean ± SD age, 61.5 ± 6.7 years; diabetes duration, 9.8 ± 6.5 years; HbA1c, 7.1 ± 0.5%; BMI, 30.7 ± 4.3 kg/m2) treated with metformin and sulfonylurea were randomized to add once-daily GLA or NPH at bedtime. At baseline and after 3 months, subjects received a standardized breakfast, lunch and dinner, with pre- and postprandial blood sampling to measure plasma IP, total insulin and blood glucose (BG).Results:Insulin dose after 3 months was comparable in both groups (GLA vs. NPH: 23.6 ± 13.4 vs. 23.3 ± 12.7; p = NS ). Both treatments significantly reduced fasting BG levels (GLA: 158 ± 19 to 121 ± 23 mg/dl; NPH: 156 ± 34 to 119 ± 29 mg/dl; both p < 0.01 vs. baseline). Fasting and postprandial BG levels did not differ between groups. IP levels decreased in both groups (p < 0.05 at all timepoints). Although IP release after breakfast did not differ between treatments, GLA induced a greater reduction in IP release after lunch (p = 0.08) and dinner (p = 0.04). Total plasma insulin levels did not differ between groups.Conclusions:Adding basal insulin to metformin reduces postprandial β-cell load. While GLA and NPH had comparable effects at breakfast, GLA reduces β-cell stress more effectively at dinner, and with a trend at lunch, most probably because of its longer lasting pharmacodynamic profile.

No abstract

Background:Arterial augmentation (AP) and the augmentation index (Aix) are surrogate parameters of arterial stiffness and are commonly used as predictors for cardiovascular risk. The aim of this study is to compare these parameters in diabetic subjects and nondiabetic cardiovascular risk subjects with healthy control subjects. Methods:One hundred sixty-six nonsmoking subjects aged between 35 and 70 years were included in the study, which included 100 subjects with cardiovascular disease but not diabetes (mean age 62.73±8.75 years), 33 subjects with type 2 diabetes (66.58±2.69 years), and 33 healthy controls (51.89±8.91 years). In these subjects, arterial stiffness was measured by the difference between the second and the first systolic peak of the central pressure waveform, and the Aix was calculated as the percentage of Aix from pulse pressure. Results:Arterial augmentation was increased in subjects with diabetes (DM) with 10.21±6.97 mm Hg and in subjects with cardiovascular disease but not diabetes (CV) with 10.74±5.29 mm Hg in comparison to healthy controls (C) with 6.59±3.97 mm Hg (p < 0.0005 DM vs C; p < 0.00005 CV vs C). Moreover, Aix was increased with 26.00±9.91% in CV subjects compared to healthy controls with 19.84±9.37% (p < 0.02 CV vs C). The augmentation index was increased with 21.12±11.21% in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus compared to controls, but failed to be statistically significant. There was no statistical significance in arterial augmentation or the augmentation index between CV and diabetic subjects. Conclusion:The results of our study revealed a comparable increased augmentation index as a surrogate measure of arterial stiffness and arteriosclerosis in subjects with diabetes mellitus and in nondiabetic subjects with cardiovascular disease. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2007; 2:260-263 Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology

No abstract