QTc prolongation and diabetes therapies

Watters, K.; Munro, N.; Feher, Michael

doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2011.03520.x

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the number of patients with both neuropathy and ischemia were less in our study. Peripheral neuropathy is prevalent in type 2 diabetic patients, and these patients are far more likely to have complications or co-morbidities [ 21 ]. In our study, out of all patients with neuropathy, about 85% had moderate to severe intensity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical, Etiological, Anatomical, and Bacteriological Study of “Diabetic Foot” Patients: Results of a Single Center Study

Patil¹,

Patil

et al. 2018

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To examine the clinical pattern of foot-related complications in type 2 diabetes patients.Material and methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted among indoor, adult type 2 diabetes patients with risk factors for diabetic foot complications. The diabetic neuropathy symptom score (DNSS), Doppler scanning, ankle brachial pressure index (ABPI) assessment, neuropathy assessment, neuropathic disability score (NDS), biothesiometry evaluation, and bacteriological examination was performed. Diabetic foot risk stratification was done using the NICE risk stratification system. Foot ulcer severity was assessed with the Lipsky severity grading system.Results: Ninety-one patients (mean age 59 years; male 65.9%) were included, of which 20 (22%) had a history of ulcer and 40 (44%) were smokers. Seventy-seven (83.5%) patients had a neuropathy symptom score between 4 and 9. Biothesiometry vibration perception threshold (VPT) was “severe” in 55 (60.4%) patients. Doppler assessment showed triphasic flow in 53 patients (58.2%). Out of 52 patients (57.1%) with neuropathy, 30 (57.7%) had a severe problem. Diabetic foot ulcer, cellulitis, and callus were present in 44 (48.3%), 29 (31.5%), and 11 (12.4%) patients, respectively. Foot ulcers were present on 21 (38%) metatarsal heads, 11 (20%) toes, 10 (18%) heels, 08 (15%) ankles, and 05 (09%) lateral foot borders. Of the 55 patients who underwent culture examination, 30 (33.3%) showed the presence of Staphylococcus aureus. As per NICE risk stratification, 55 patients (60%) were at “very high risk.”Conclusion: A foot ulcer is the commonest complication in diabetic patients followed by cellulitis. Standardized simple noninvasive testing methods should be used to identify patients at risk for the diabetic foot. Multidisciplinary diabetic foot care could be useful to prevent diabetes-related amputation of the lower extremities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical, Etiological, Anatomical, and Bacteriological Study of “Diabetic Foot” Patients: Results of a Single Center Study

Patil¹,

Patil

et al. 2018

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given the lack of reliable estimates for the frequency of DSPN in different populations and the absence of clear diagnostic guidelines 17 , 18 , different clinical studies have been conducted by using various screening methods to identify DSPN 19 – 40 . QST, neuropathy disability score, Michigan neuropathy screening method, vibration sensing with a 128 Hz tuning fork, and monofilament test are used for assessing pain, touch, vibration, and temperature sensation loss due to DSPN 9 – 12 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance analysis of noninvasive electrophysiological methods for the assessment of diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy in clinical research: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

Haque

Reaz

Ali

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the availability of various clinical trials that used different diagnostic methods to identify diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSPN), no reliable studies that prove the associations among diagnostic parameters from two different methods are available. Statistically significant diagnostic parameters from various methods can help determine if two different methods can be incorporated together for diagnosing DSPN. In this study, a systematic review, meta-analysis, and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed to determine the associations among the different parameters from the most commonly used electrophysiological screening methods in clinical research for DSPN, namely, nerve conduction study (NCS), corneal confocal microscopy (CCM), and electromyography (EMG), for different experimental groups. Electronic databases (e.g., Web of Science, PubMed, and Google Scholar) were searched systematically for articles reporting different screening tools for diabetic peripheral neuropathy. A total of 22 studies involving 2394 participants (801 patients with DSPN, 702 controls, and 891 non-DSPN patients) were reviewed systematically. Meta-analysis was performed to determine statistical significance of difference among four NCS parameters, i.e., peroneal motor nerve conduction velocity, peroneal motor nerve amplitude, sural sensory nerve conduction velocity, and sural sensory nerve amplitude (all p < 0.001); among three CCM parameters, including nerve fiber density, nerve branch density, and nerve fiber length (all p < 0.001); and among four EMG parameters, namely, time to peak occurrence (from 0 to 100% of the stance phase) of four lower limb muscles, including the vastus lateralis (p < 0.001), tibialis anterior (p = 0.63), lateral gastrocnemius (p = 0.01), and gastrocnemius medialis (p = 0.004), and the vibration perception threshold (p < 0.001). Moreover, TSA was conducted to estimate the robustness of the meta-analysis. Most of the parameters showed statistical significance between each other, whereas some were statistically nonsignificant. This meta-analysis and TSA concluded that studies including NCS and CCM parameters were conclusive and robust. However, the included studies on EMG were inconclusive, and additional clinical trials are required.

show abstract