RESUMO
Background: There are many methods to diagnose diabetic autonomic neuropathy (DAN); however, often, the various methods do not provide consistent results. Even the two methods recommended by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) guidelines, Ewing's test and heart rate variability (HRV), sometimes give conflicting results. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the degree of agreement of the results of the Composite Autonomic Symptom Score 31 (COMPASS-31), skin sympathetic reaction (SSR) test, Ewing's test, and HRV in diagnosing DAN. Methods: Patients with type 2 diabetes were recruited and each received the COMPASS-31, SSR, Ewing's test, and HRV for the diagnosis of DAN. Patients were categorized as DAN(+) and DAN(-) by each of the tests. Kappa consistency tests were used to evaluate the agreement of diagnosing DAN between any two methods. Spearman's correlation test was used to evaluate the correlations of the severity of DAN between any two methods. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were used to evaluate the diagnostic value and the cutoff value of each method. Results: A total of 126 type 2 diabetic patients were included in the study. The percentages of DAN(+) results by HRV, Ewing's test, COMPASS-31, and SSR were 61, 40, 35, and 33%, respectively. COMPASS-31 and Ewing's test had the best agreement for diagnosing DAN (κ = 0.512, p < 0.001). COMPASS-31 and Ewing's test also had the best correlation with respect to the severity of DAN (r = 0.587, p < 0.001). Ewing's test and COMPASS-31 had relatively good diagnostic values (AUC = 0.703 and 0.630, respectively) in the ROC analyses. Conclusions: COMPASS-31 and Ewing's test exhibit good diagnostic consistency and severity correlation for the diagnosis of DAN. Either test is suitable for the diagnosis of DAN and treatment follow-up.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The incidence of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is increasing among youth worldwide, translating to an increased risk ofearly-onset cardiovascular disease (CVD). Mounting studies have shown that metformin may reduce maximal carotidintima-media thickness (cIMT), improve insulin resistance and metabolic control in subjects with T1DM, and thus, may extend cardioprotective benefits. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of metformin added to insulin therapy on reducing CVD risks and improving metabolism in T1DM. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared metformin and insulin combination (duration ≥3 months) to insulin treatment alone in T1DM. Data were expressed as weighted/standardized mean differences (MDs/SMDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to evaluate the overall certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: Nineteen RCTs (n = 1540) met the eligibility criteria. Metformin treatment significantly reduced carotid artery intima-media thickness (MD -0.06 mm [95% CI -0.88, -0.28], P < .001). Though no significant difference was found in insulin sensitivity (SMD 2.21 [95% CI -1.88, 6.29], P = .29), the total daily insulin dosage (SMD -0.81 [95% CI -1.25, -0.36], P < .001) along with traditional CVD risk factors showed improvement by better glycaemic control, partial lipid profiles, diastolic blood pressure, and limited weight gain, with neutral effect on diabetic ketoacidosis, lactic acidosis, and hypoglycaemia. However, metformin therapy increased the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Metformin with insulin has the potential to retard the progression of atherosclerosis and provides better metabolic control in patients with T1DM, and thus, providing a potential therapeutic strategy for patients with T1DM on reducing CVD risks.
