Individuals with type 2 diabetes have a three- to fivefold increased risk of developing heart failure. Diabetic cardiomyopathy is typified by left ventricular (LV) concentric remodeling, which is a recognized predictor of adverse cardiovascular events. Although the mechanisms underlying LV remodeling in type 2 diabetes are unclear, progressive aortic stiffening may be a key determinant. The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between aortic stiffness and LV geometry in younger adults with type 2 diabetes, using multiparametric cardiovascular MRI. We prospectively recruited 80 adults (aged 18-65 years) with type 2 diabetes and no cardiovascular disease and 20 age- and sex-matched healthy control subjects. All subjects underwent comprehensive bio-anthropometric assessment and cardiac MRI, including measurement of aortic stiffness by aortic distensibility (AD). Type 2 diabetes was associated with increased LV mass, concentric LV remodeling, and lower AD compared with control subjects. On multivariable linear regression, AD was independently associated with concentric LV remodeling in type 2 diabetes. Aortic stiffness may therefore be a potential therapeutic target to prevent the development of heart failure in type 2 diabetes.
BackgroundAortic stiffness is one of the earliest signs of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in patients with chronic kidney disease and an independent predictor of mortality. It is thought to drive left ventricular (LV) remodelling, an established biomarker for mortality. The relationship between direct and indirect measures of aortic stiffness and LV remodelling is not defined in dialysis patients, nor are the reproducibility of methods used to assess aortic stiffness using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging.MethodsUsing 3T CMR, we report the results of (i) the interstudy, interobserver and intra-observer reproducibility of ascending aortic distensibility (AAD), descending aortic distensibility (DAD) and aortic pulse wave velocity (aPWV) in 10 haemodialysis (HD) patients and (ii) the relationship between AAD, DAD and aPWV and LV mass index (LVMi) and LV remodelling in 70 HD patients.ResultsInter- and intra-observer variability of AAD, DAD and aPWV were excellent [intraclass correlation (ICC) > 0.9 for all]. Interstudy reproducibility of AAD was excellent {ICC 0.94 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78–0.99]}, but poor for DAD and aPWV [ICC 0.51 (−0.13–0.85) and 0.51 (−0.31–0.89)]. AAD, DAD and aPWV associated with LVMi on univariate analysis (β = −0.244, P = 0.04; β =−0.315, P < 0.001 and β = 0.242, P = 0.04, respectively). Only systolic blood pressure, serum phosphate and a history of CVD remained independent determinants of LVMi on multivariable linear regression.ConclusionsAAD is the most reproducible CMR-derived measure of aortic stiffness in HD patients. CMR-derived measures of aortic stiffness were not independent determinants of LVMi in HD patients. Whether one should target blood pressure over aortic stiffness to mitigate cardiovascular risk still needs determination.
ObjectivesRandomised controlled trial of the effect of a perineural infusion of levobupivacaine on moderate/severe phantom limb pain 6 months after major lower limb amputation.SettingSingle-centre, UK university hospital.ParticipantsNinety patients undergoing above-knee and below-knee amputation for chronic limb threatening ischaemia under general anaesthesia. Exclusion criteria were patients having surgery under neuraxial anaesthesia; inability to operate a patient-controlled analgesia device or complete a Visual Analogue Scale; amputation for trauma or malignancy; or contraindication to levobupivacaine.InterventionsEither levobupivacaine 0.125% or saline 0.9% (10 mL bolus, infusion of 8 mL/hour for 96 hours) via a sciatic or posterior tibial nerve sheath catheter placed under direct vision during surgery.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary outcome measure was the presence of phantom limb pain, residual limb pain and phantom limb sensations up to 6 months after amputation. Secondary outcome measures included early postoperative pain and morphine requirements after surgery.ResultsData from 81 participants were analysed; 6-month follow-up data were available for 62 patients. Pain and morphine requirements varied widely before and after amputation in both groups. The incidences of moderate/severe phantom limb pain, residual limb pain and phantom limb sensations were low from 6 weeks with no significant differences between groups in phantom limb pain at rest (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.14 to 2.14, p=0.394) or movement (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.21, p=0.425) at 6 months. Early postoperative pain scores were low in both groups with no between-group differences in residual limb pain or phantom limb sensations (rest or movement) at any time point. High postoperative morphine consumption was associated with worsening phantom limb pain both at rest (−17.51, 95% CI −24.29 to −10.74; p<0.001) and on movement (−18.54, 95% CI −25.58 to −11.49; p<0.001). The incidence of adverse effects related to the study was low in both groups: postoperative nausea, vomiting and sedation scores were similar, and there were no features of local anaesthetic toxicity.ConclusionsLong-term phantom limb pain, residual limb pain and phantom limb sensations were not reduced significantly by perineural infusion of levobupivacaine, although the study was underpowered to show significant differences in the primary outcome. The incidence of phantom limb pain was lower than previously reported, possibly attributable to frequent assessment and early intervention to identify and treat postoperative pain when it occurred. There were large variations in postoperative pain scores, high requirements for analgesics before and after surgery and some problems maintaining recruitment and long -term follow-up. Knowledge of these potential problems should inform future research in this group of patients. Further work should investigate the association between perioperative morphine requirements and late phantom limb pain.Trial registration numbersEudraCT 2007-000619-27;ISRCTN68691928.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.