ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Endothelium-dependent dilation is improved in insulin-treated diabetic patients, but this effect is probably due to improved glycemic control. The objective of the present study was to compare endothelium-dependent dilation in patients with well-controlled type 2 diabetes who are or are not using insulin as part of their therapy. METHODS: We studied 27 patients with type 2 diabetes (11 women, 60.3 years ± 6 years, with HbA1c < 7 percent and no nephropathy), including 16 patients treated with anti-diabetic agents (No-Ins, 8 women) and 11 patients treated with insulin alone or in combination with anti-diabetic agents (Ins, 3 women). Endothelial function was evaluated by the dorsal hand vein technique, which measures changes in vein diameter in response to phenylephrine, acetylcholine (endothelium-dependent vasodilation) and sodium nitroprusside (endothelium-independent vasodilation). RESULTS: Age, systolic blood pressure (No-Ins: 129.4 mmHg ± 11.8 mmHg, Ins: 134.8 mmHg ± 12.0 mmHg; P= 0.257), HbA1c, lipids and urinary albumin excretion rate [No-Ins: 9 mg/24 h (0-14.1 mg/24 h) vs. Ins: 10.6 mg/24 h (7.5-14.4 mg/24 h), P=0.398] were similar between groups. There was no difference between endothelium-dependent vasodilation of the No-Ins group (59.3 percent ± 26.5 percent) vs. the Ins group (54.0 percent ± 16.3 percent; P=0.526). Endothelium-independent vasodilation was also similar between the No-Ins (113.7 percent ± 35.3 percent) and Ins groups (111.9 percent ± 28.5 percent; P=0.888). CONCLUSIONS: Subcutaneous insulin therapy does not interfere with venous endothelial function in type 2 diabetes when glycemic and blood pressure control are stable.
Subject(s)
Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , /drug therapy , Endothelium, Vascular/drug effects , Hypoglycemic Agents/pharmacology , Insulin/pharmacology , Vasodilation/drug effects , Blood Pressure/drug effects , /physiopathology , Endothelium, Vascular/physiology , Risk Factors , Statistics, NonparametricABSTRACT
Os autores descrevem caso de paciente com fibrose retroperitoneal idiopática e revisão da patologia. Esta rara doença de etiologia incerta caracteriza-se por inflamação crônica do retroperitôneo, ocasionalmente aprisionando e obstruindo estruturas, notavelmente os ureteres. Trata-se de um paciente do sexo masculino, 45 anos, com dor em flanco esquerdo irradiada para testículo, em cólica, com piora progressiva. Feito o diagnóstico de fibrose retroperitoneal com compressão ureteral à esquerda (tomografia computadorizada do abdome), o paciente foi submetido a desobstrução ureteral com colocação de cateter duplo J e, posteriormente, a tratamento clínico com prednisona. Não houve regressão da massa fibrótica, mas melhora clínica quanto à dor e à ausência de novo episódio de obstrução ureteral. Os autores ressaltam a necessidade de suspeição da patologia descrita, mesmo sendo rara, pela possibilidade de complicações graves, se seu diagnóstico não for realizado e o tratamento não for instituído no tempo ideal
A case report of a patient with idiopathic retroperitoneal fibrosis (RPF) is described and the condition is reviewed as well. RPF is a rare disease of unclear etiology characterized by chronic retroperitoneal inflammation, which can entrap and obstruct retroperitoneal structures, notably ureters. A 45-year-old male patient presented with colic-likeleft flank pain irradiating to the testicle and progressively worsening. Retroperitoneal fibrosis with left ureteral compression was diagnosed in a abdominal computed tomography scan and the patient was submitted to reteral unblocking with insertion of a double-J catheter and then to clinical treatment with prednisone. Although there was no regression of the fibrotic mass, pain clinically relieved and no new ureteral obstruction episodes were seen. This case illustrates the importance of suspecting the above described condition. Although rare, RPF can potentially cause severe complications if it is not diagnosed and treated timely