Six months of aerobic exercise does not improve microvascular function in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus have impaired microvascular function. It has been hypothesised that microvascular function may be restored through regular exercise. The aim of this study was to investigate whether 6 months of regular aerobic exercise would improve microvascular function in adults with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-nine patients with type 2 diabetes (32 males, age 62.9+/-7.6 years, HbA(1c) 6.8+/-0.9%) were randomised to either a 6-month aerobic exercise programme (30 min, three times a week, 70-80% of maximal heart rate) or a 'standard care' control group. Before and after the intervention period, microvascular function was assessed as the maximum skin hyperaemia to local heating and endothelial and non-endothelial responsiveness following the iontophoretic application of acetylcholine and sodium nitroprusside. Maximal oxygen uptake, as an index of aerobic fitness, was assessed using a maximal exercise test. RESULTS: No significant improvement was seen in the exercise group compared with the control group for any of the variables measured: maximal oxygen uptake (control pre: 1.73+/-0.53 [means+/-SD] vs post: 1.67+/-0.40; exercise pre: 1.75+/-0.56 vs post: 1.87+/-0.62 l/min, p=0.10); insulin sensitivity (insulin tolerance test) (control pre: -0.17+/-0.06 vs post: -0.17+/-0.06; exercise pre: -0.16+/-0.1 vs post: -0.17+/-0.07 mmol l(-1) min(-1), p=0.97); maximal hyperaemia (control pre: 1.49+/-0.43 vs post: 1.52+/-0.57; exercise pre: 1.42+/-0.36 vs post: 1.47+/-0.33 V, p=0.85); peak response to acetylcholine (control pre: 1.37+/-0.47 vs post: 1.28+/-0.37; exercise pre: 1.27+/-0.44 vs post: 1.44+/-0.23 V, p=0.19) or to sodium nitroprusside (control pre: 1.09+/-0.50 vs post: 1.10+/-0.39; exercise pre: 1.12+/-0.28 vs post: 1.13+/-0.40 V, p=0.98). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In this group of type 2 diabetic patients with good glycaemic control a 6-month aerobic exercise programme did not improve microvascular function or aerobic fitness.

The insulin sensitiser pioglitazone does not influence skin microcirculatory function in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with insulin.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Insulin resistance is associated with abnormal microvascular function. Treatment with insulin sensitisers may provoke oedema, suggesting microvascular effects. The mechanisms underlying the peripheral oedema observed during glucose-lowering treatment with thiazolidinediones are unclear. Therefore we examined the effect of pioglitazone on microvascular variables involved in oedema formation. METHODS: Subjects (40-80 years) with type 2 diabetes and on insulin were randomised to 9 weeks of pioglitazone therapy (30 mg/day; n=14) or placebo (n=15). The following assessments were performed at baseline and 9 weeks: microvascular filtration capacity; isovolumetric venous pressure; capillary pressure; capillary recruitment following venous or arterial occlusion; postural vasoconstriction; and maximum blood flow. A number of haematological variables were also measured including vascular endothelium growth factor (VEGF), IL-6 and C-reactive protein (CRP). RESULTS: Pioglitazone did not significantly influence any microcirculatory variable as compared with placebo (analysis of covariance [ANCOVA] for microvascular filtration capacity for the two groups, p=0.26). Mean VEGF increased with pioglitazone (61.1 pg/ml), but not significantly more than placebo (9.76 pg/ml, p=0.94). HbA(1c) levels and the inflammatory markers IL-6 and CRP decreased with pioglitazone compared with placebo (ANCOVA: p=0.009, p=0.001 and p=0.004, respectively). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Pioglitazone improved glycaemic control and inflammatory markers over 9 weeks but had no effect on microcirculatory variables associated with oedema or insulin resistance in type 2 diabetic patients treated with insulin.