INTRODUCTION
Diabetic autonomic neuropathy (DAN) has received
less attention than the other diabetic complications1, it is one of the most overlooked of all serious
complications of diabetes2 and among the least recognized and understood
diabetic complications despite it has a significant negative impact on survival
and quality of life in people with diabetes.3
DAN is a subtype of the peripheral polyneuropathies
that accompany diabetes, it may be either clinically evident or subclinical.4 Subclinical autonomic dysfunction can occur within
a year of diagnosis in type 2 diabetes patients and within two years in type 1
diabetes patients, however, Clinical symptoms of DAN generally do not occur
until long after the onset of diabetes.5 The reported prevalence of DAN vary from as low as
16% in newly diagnosed diabetic patients6 to as much as 75% in established diabetes.7
The
manifestations of DAN includes dysfunction of one or more organ systems (such
as cardiovascular, gastrointestinal (GI), genitourinary, sudomotor, or
ocular)4, cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) is the
most clinically important form of DAN8, it results from damage to the autonomic nerve
fibers that innervate the heart and blood vessels leading to dysfunctional
heart-rate control and abnormal vascular dynamics9, which manifested clinically by decrease in heart
rate variation (HRV) during deep breathing10, postural hypotension, exercise intolerance,
intraoperative cardiovascular labiality, and silent myocardial
ischemia/infarction.9
Some studies have found CAN to be associated with
sudden cardiac death11 and to be an independent predictor of mortality.12 The mortality rate among patients with CAN across
several studies reported to be 27% among diabetic subjects with CAN compared
with 5% among those without.13
Aim of Work
Since CAN often develops in parallel with diabetic
neuropathy as a confounder14, we aimed to investigate the potential association between diabetic
polyneuropathy and the increased risk of cardiovascular events with correlating
cardiovascular risk with severity of polyneuropathy to be used as a marker of
cardiovascular disease in diabetic patients.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
This study was conducted in the neurology and
internal medicine departments at Riyadh
National Hospital,
Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. A database was
created of 67 patients with Diabetes Mellitus, from whom only 55 completed the
study until its end.
The study had been approved by the scientific
committee at Riyadh
National Hospital
and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 1983. Informed consent
was taken from the patients to participate in this study.
Patients included in this study
should satisfy the following criteria; (i) diagnosis of type 2 diabetes
mellitus according to World Health Organization 1999 criteria, and (ii)
willingness to sign informed consent form. Exclusion criteria includes (i)
patients with other causes of neuropathy rather than diabetic, (ii) pregnant
women, because of possible temporary changes in blood chemistry, circulation
and pain sensitivity, and (iii) albuminuria (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio
>30 mg/g, elevated S-creatinine >120 mmol/L) (For avoidance of the
confounding effect of diabetic nephropathy).
A data collecting sheet was
filled by the internal medicine doctor to record demographic data and relevant
medical history, then were screened for diabetic peripheral neuropathy by a
neurologist using Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument (MNSI).15
It consists of a two-step program. The first part assessed a Neuropathic
symptom by a history questionnaire consists of 15 "yes or no"
questions on foot sensation including pain, numbness and temperature
sensitivity. The second part is a brief physical examination involving an
inspection of the feet and evaluation of ankle reflexes, vibration sensation
and fine touch.
Neuropathy is defined operationally as seven or more
positive responses on the MNSI questionnaire or a score >2.0 on the MNSI
examination, thresholds defined by prior validation studies.16 The screening method for fine touch sensation,
vibration perception and ankle reflex using 10-g SWM, 128-Hz tuning fork and
reflex hummer was followed the practical guideline from Michigan Diabetes
Research and Training Center.15
The Neuropathy severity assessed by Toronto Clinical
Neuropathy Scoring System (TCSS): Sensory testing was performed on the first
toe. Symptom scores: present =1, absent =0. Reflex scores: absent =2, reduced
=1, normal =0. Sensory test score: abnormal =1, normal =0. Total scores range
from normal =0 to maximum of 19. A score ≤5 was recorded as showing no
neuropathy, 6–8 mild, 9–11 moderate, and >11 equated to severe neuropathy.
Electro-diagnostic studies (EDS)
were performed with standard electrophysiological and electro-myographic
equipment provided by major manufacturers (Nicolet®, Teca®, and Disa®). Digital
skin thermometers accurate to 0.1°C to ensure that skin temperatures were at
least 32°C. Trained electro-physiologists performed the examinations. Velocity
was determined for the distal sural and ulnar sensory nerves and for the
peroneal motor nerve (knee to ankle) unilaterally on the nondominant side.
Response amplitude was measured overlying the dorsal surface of the foot for the
sural nerve, at the fifth finger for the ulnar nerve and overlying the extensor
digitorum brevis muscle for the peroneal nerve.
Patients have been further subdivided into 2 groups;
group 1 included 32 patients with CAN (+CAN), and group 2 included 23 patients
without CAN (–CAN), according to the outcome of four autonomic function tests;
heart rate variability (HRV) during deep breathing, valsalva ratio, lying-to
standing test, and blood pressure response to standing up. Patient with CAN
(+CAN) was defined as two or more abnormal tests17, and age-normative values were used to define
abnormality.18
The lying-to-standing heart rate ratio was
determined after at least 5 min rest in the supine position, and HRV was
determined by calculating the maximal to minimal heart rate ratio; the longest
R-R interval, measured around the 30th beat after standing up, to
the shortest R-R interval, measured around the 15th beat after standing up.
The Valsalva test consisted of forced exhalation
into a mouthpiece with a pressure of 40 mmHg for 15 seconds, and the ratio of
the maximum R-R after the maneuver to the minimum R-R during the maneuver was
calculated. The test was performed three times, and the mean value of the
ratios was used.
Orthostatic hypotension was
defined as a decrease in systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 30 mmHg when changing
from supine to the upright position. Measurements were taken every minute for
at least 3 minutes.
Glycemic control was assessed via HbA1c levels. Body
mass index (BMI) was calculated using the equation [weight in kilogram/(height
in meter)2]. Categorized as Normal
(< 25 kg/m2), overweight (25-30 kg/m2) and obese (>30 kg/m2).
Statistical
Analysis
For descriptive
statistics the frequency and percentage were calculated for qualitative
variables, the mean values ±standard deviation (SD), and range were used for
quantitative variables. For comparison between two groups student t-test was
calculated. For correlation, Pearson correlation was used. Statistical
computations were done using the computer software SPSS version 16 (Chicago, IL,
USA).
Statistical significance was predefined as P ≤0.05.
RESULTS
One hundred diabetic patients were screened using
MNSI, of whom 89% had diabetic polyneuropathy, 36 patients were +CAN and 41
were -CAN, the results for the remaining 12 patients were not conclusive so
they were excluded from the research. Of the total number of patients, 55
patients have completed the study to its end (23 patients +CAN, and 32 patients
–CAN). Sixty percent of our patients were females and 40% were males. Ages
varied from 35 years to 82 years (mean ±SD, 55.78 ±10.75 years). Clinical
characteristics of the patient with diabetic polyneuropathy with or without CAN
are summarized in (Tables 1).
Age, BMI, HbA1c within
the last 3 months, lipid profile, diastolic blood pressure and serum creatinine
were comparable among +CAN and –CAN group. Therefore, none of these parameter
can be used as a marker for CAN, while longer duration of diabetes and higher
systolic blood pressure were present in +CAN patients compared to –CAN group
patients (Table 1).
In the studied groups, male patient had a longer
duration of diabetes compared to females, males are also older than female with
mean age of 62.30±12.10 years in the +CAN group and 62.00±9.40 years in the
–CAN group (Table 1).
HbA1C percentage was higher among men in
both groups compared to women refecting bad glycemic control in men. Serum
creatinine and triglycerides were higher in men compared to women in both
groups, while the rest of the laboratory findings were comparable among both
sexes (Table 1).
Diabetic neuropathy questioner (DNS) and diabetic
neuropathy examination (DNE) showed high statistically significant correlation
with the presence of autonomic cardiovascular neuropathy (Table 2).
Our results revealed that CAN correlates with the
severity of diabetic neuropathy measured by TCSS as there is a strong
statistical correlation between severity of diabetic neuropathy and presence of
the CAN.
The mean of TCSS was reduced markedly in +CAN compared to–CAN group (Table 6),
Moreover, the presence of CAN correlates with changes in the nerve conduction
velocity and amplitude in sural nerve, popliteal nerve and ulnar nerve (Table
3).
By comparing the means and standard deviations of
nerve conduction velocity (NCV) among the +CAN patients group and –CAN patients
group there was reduction of NCV in +CAN group compared to –CAN group (Table
3).
Also by comparing the compound motor action
potential amplitude in +CAN group of patients and –CAN group of patients there
were statistically significant reduction of the mean of nerve amplitude (Table
3).
Figure 1. Toronto clinical scoring system in Cardiac
Autonomic Neuropathy positive and negative patients.
Table 1.
Clinical characteristics of patients with and without Cardiac Autonomic
Neuropathy.
|
+ CAN
|
- CAN
|
P-
Value
|
|
Female
|
Male
|
Female
|
Male
|
Number
|
13
|
10
|
20
|
12
|
NS
|
Age (ys)
|
56.08±8.67
|
62.30±12.10
|
48.60±7.69
|
62.00±9.40
|
<0.05*
|
Duration of diabetes (ys)
|
20.92±5.79
|
26.60±10.49
|
13.45±5.17
|
20.83±7.64
|
NS
|
HbA1C (%)
|
9.67±2.20
|
10.19±1.95
|
7.73±1.80
|
9.32±1.99
|
NS
|
BMI (kg/m2)
|
34.35±4.32
|
31.81±2.74
|
31.82±3.05
|
37.32±2.06
|
<0.05*
|
Waist Circumference
|
100.62±5.66
|
108.35±5.36
|
98.55±3.87
|
116.92±1.98
|
NS
|
S-creatinine (mmol/L)
|
83.62±8.70
|
102.30±18.24
|
79.70±7.79
|
108.83±8.50
|
<0.05*
|
SBP (mmHg)
|
127.69±17.39
|
120.50±8.96
|
129.50±13.27
|
141.67±13.03
|
NS
|
DBP (mmHg)
|
76.31±11.91
|
76.50±7.47
|
75.35±9.05
|
75.00±14.90
|
NS
|
Total cholesterol (mmol/L)
|
4.52±0.81
|
4.48±0.84
|
3.89±0.64
|
4.09±0.52
|
NS
|
HDL cholesterol (mmol/L)
|
1.08±0.20
|
1.22±0.27
|
1.23±0.16
|
0.95±0.26
|
NS
|
LDL cholesterol (mmol/L)
|
2.62±0.68
|
2.45±0.65
|
1.94±0.54
|
3.07±0.59
|
NS
|
Triglycerides (mmol/L)
|
1.96±0.88
|
2.14±1.17
|
1.29±0.60
|
3.48±1.20
|
NS
|
Data are expressed as mean
±SD,
BMI body mass index, +CAN
patients with Cardiac autonomic neuropathy, -CAN patients without Cardiac
autonomic neuropathy, DBP
diastolic blood pressure, NS non-significant statistically, SBP
systolic blood pressure, Yr years, CAN: Cardiac autonomic neuropathy
*Significant
at P<0.05
Table 2. Diabetic Neuropathy severity
measured by Toronto Clinical Scoring System in patients with and without
Cardiac autonomic neuropathy.
|
+ CAN
Patients
|
- CAN
Patients
|
P-value
|
Diabetic Neuropathy Symptoms
|
9.88±1.44
|
7.44±0.67
|
<0.01*
|
Diabetic Neuropathy Examination
|
3.11±1.07
|
1.02±0.48
|
<0.01*
|
Toronto
Clinical Scoring System
|
13.39±2.06
|
8.25±1.11
|
<0.01*
|
Data are expressed as mean ± SD
*Significant
at P<0.01
Table 3. Comparing nerve conduction
studies between patients with and without Cardiac Autonomic Neuropathy.
|
+ CAN Patients
|
- CAN Patients
|
P-value
|
Sural Nerve conduction velocity
|
28.07
±17.46
|
32.97
±21.11
|
0.366
|
Sural Nerve Amplitude
|
2.88
±2.01
|
4.69
±3.43
|
<0.05*
|
Popliteal Nerve conduction velocity
|
40.49
±4.74
|
43.59
±2.12
|
<0.05*
|
Popliteal Nerve Amplitude
|
5.34
±0.93
|
6.47
±1.16
|
<0.05*
|
Ulnar Nerve conduction velocity
|
41.02
±5.91
|
73.19
±10.24
|
<0.05*
|
Ulnar Nerve Amplitude
|
5.43
±1.50
|
13.68
±3.60
|
<0.05*
|
Data are expressed as mean ± SD
*Significant
at P<0.05
DISCUSSION
Cardiac autonomic neuropathy represents a serious
complication as it carries an approximately five-fold risk of mortality in
patients with diabetes.10
Our results showed an increasing in risk of
neuropathy severity with increasing duration of diabetes affection and with
poor glycemic control, confirming the previously reported strong contributions
of glycemic control and duration of diabetes to the risk of neuropathy.19 While the duration of diabetes mellitus was statistically significantly
prolonged in +CAN compared to –CAN patients, glycemic control failed to get
significant difference between the two groups.
The EURODIAB data showed an association of low HDL
cholesterol and high triglycerides in patients with cardiovascular autonomic
neuropathy, suggesting a role for an adverse lipid profile in the pathogenesis
of CAN20, but our results failed to detect statistically significant differences
between +CAN and –CAN groups regarding the HDL cholesterol and high
triglycerides.
Our results showed a significant reduction of the
mean SBP in +CAN group compared to –CAN group (124.57±14.53 to 134.06±14.28
respectively), while the mean DBP in +CAN group show insignificant reduction
compared to –CAN group. Finding in agreement with that obtained by other studies,
that showed falls in arterial pressure, especially in the standing position and
after insulin administration in diabetes patients with either abnormal
baroreceptor reflexes or autonomic neuropathy.21
A relationship of diabetic polyneuropathy with
autonomic cardiovascular dysfunction has already been observed. However, it
does not seem to us the presence of any data correlating association between
EDS, DNS and DNE with CAN in literatures. To date, few investigators have
examined the relationships between different measures of neurophysiological
function in diabetic peripheral neuropathies.22 In the current study, the Diabetic Neuropathy
Symptom score (DNS), DNE, TCSS and EDS are further validated with the CAN. Our
results revealed a statistically significant relationship between the DNS, DNE,
EDS scores and +CAN, so by assessing the DNS and DNE scores at the outpatient
clinic, a good predictor is given for presence or absence of CAN. These results
are consistent with Jesper Fleischer studies who stated that there is a clear
association between the degree of diabetic autonomic imbalance and peripheral
neuropathy.2 But our results were in contrary with Gibbons and colleagues (2010), who concluded
that neurophysiological tests may not be specific for small, large, or
autonomic nerve fiber subtypes and in the absence of pathological confirmation,
they are unable to determine whether test variation is due to nerve
dysfunction, demyelination, or axonal loss.23
Although there is no specific therapeutic
interventions are available for neuropathy except strict glycemic control,
instruction to avoid complication of diabetes, and symptomatic treatment, the
early detection of the cardiovascular abnormality and preventive measures
application has a crucial role enabling the physician, in screening, prevention,
and instruction for early management autonomic neuropathy. The performance of
the DNS and DNE scores, eventually in combination with EDS, may be sufficiently
be used to subsequently reduce the morbidity and mortality among +CAN patients.14
Conclusion
This study revealed that the DNS,
DNE and TCSS scores could allow discrimination between patients with and
without diabetic CAN. These scores are strongly related to EDS and CAN tests
subsequently could confirm the strength of the DNS and DNE scores in diagnosing
diabetic CAN in clinical practice. Further research should be done to specify
an optimal set of diagnostic categories for diabetic CAN.
[Disclosure:
Authors report no conflict of interest]
REFERENCES
1.
Hosking DJ, Bennett T, Hampton JR. Diabetic autonomic
neuropathy. Diabetes. 1978; 27:1043-55.
2.
Vinik AI, Ziegler D. Diabetic
cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy. Circulation. 2007; 115:387-97.
3.
Vinik AI, Erbas T. Recognizing and treating diabetic autonomic
neuropathy. Cleve Clin J Med. 2001; 68:928-44.
4.
Report and recommendations of the San Antonio conference
on diabetic neuropathy. Consensus statement. Diabetes. 1988; 37:1000-4.
5.
Pfeifer MA, Weinberg CR, Cook DL, Reenan A, Halter JB,
Ensinck JW, et al. Autonomic neural dysfunction in recently diagnosed diabetic
subjects. Diabetes Care. 1984; 7:447-53.
6.
O'Brien IA, McFadden JP, Corrall
RJ. The influence of autonomic neuropathy on mortality in insulin-dependent
diabetes. Q J Med. 1991; 79:495-502.
7.
Navarro X, Kennedy WR, Sutherland DE. Autonomic
neuropathy and survival in diabetes mellitus: effects of pancreas
transplantation. Diabetologia. 1991; 34 (Suppl 1):S108-12.
8.
Ewing DJ. Cardiovascular reflexes and autonomic
neuropathy. Clin Sci Mol Med. 1978; 55:321-7.
9.
Freeman R. Cardiovascular autonomic
neuropathy. In: Dyck PJ TPE, editor.
Diabetic Neuropathy. Second ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1999. p.
541-54.
10. Ziegler D.
Diabetic cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy: prognosis, diagnosis and
treatment. Diabetes Metab Rev. 1994; 10:339-83.
11. Rathmann W,
Ziegler D, Jahnke M, Haastert B, Gries FA. Mortality in diabetic patients with
cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy. Diabet Med. 1993; 10:820-4.
12. Wirta O,
Pasternack A, Mustonen J, Laippala P. Renal and cardiovascular predictors of
9-year total and sudden cardiac mortality in non-insulin-dependent diabetic
subjects. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 1997; 12:2612-7.
13. Orchard TJ,
LLoyd CE, Maser RE, Kuller LH. Why does diabetic autonomic neuropathy predict
IDDM mortality? An analysis from the Pittsburgh Epidemiology of Diabetes
Complications Study. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 1996; 34 (Suppl):S165-71.
14. Mogensen UM,
Jensen T, Kober L, Kelbaek H, Mathiesen AS, Dixen U, et al. Cardiovascular
autonomic neuropathy and subclinical cardiovascular disease in normoalbuminuric
type 1 diabetic patients. Diabetes. 2012; 61:1822-30.
15. Michigan Neuropathy Screening
Instrument [homepage on the Internat]. No date
[cited 2014 Oct 1]. Availble from:
http://www.med.umich.edu/borc/profs/survey.html
16. Feldman EL,
Stevens MJ, Thomas PK, Brown MB, Canal N, Greene DA. A practical two-step
quantitative clinical and electrophysiological assessment for the diagnosis and
staging of diabetic neuropathy. Diabetes Care. 1994; 17:1281-9.
17. Tesfaye S,
Boulton AJ, Dyck PJ, Freeman R, Horowitz M, Kempler P, et al. Diabetic
neuropathies: update on definitions, diagnostic criteria, estimation of
severity, and treatments. Diabetes Care. 2010; 33:2285-93.
18. Bernardi L,
Spallone V, Stevens M, Hilsted J, Frontoni S, Pop-Busui R, et al. Methods of
investigation for cardiac autonomic dysfunction in human research studies.
Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2011; 27:654-64.
19. Tesfaye S,
Stevens LK, Stephenson JM, Fuller JH, Plater M, Ionescu-Tirgoviste C, et al.
Prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy and its relation to glycaemic
control and potential risk factors: the EURODIAB IDDM Complications Study.
Diabetologia. 1996; 39:1377-84.
20. Tesfaye S,
Chaturvedi N, Eaton SE, Ward JD, Manes C, Ionescu-Tirgoviste C, et al. Vascular
risk factors and diabetic neuropathy. N Engl J Med. 2005; 352:341-50.
21. Page MM, Watkins
PJ. Provocation of postural hypotension by insulin in diabetic autonomic
neuropathy. Diabetes. 1976; 25:90-5.
22. Hamdy O,
Abou-Elenin K, Logerfo FW, Horton ES, Veves A. Contribution of nerve-axon
reflex-related vasodilation to the total skin vasodilation in diabetic patients
with and without neuropathy. Diabetes Care. 2001; 24:344-9.
23. Gibbons CH,
Freeman R, Veves A. Diabetic neuropathy: a cross-sectional study of the
relationships among tests of neurophysiology. Diabetes Care. 2010; 33:2629-34.
الملخص العربى
تشخيص الاعتلال العصبي السكري
اللاإرادي للقلب والأوعية الدموية
ان الاعتلال العصبي السكري هو من
اكثر المضاعفات شيوعا لدى مرضى البول السكري، ويعتبر الاعتلال العصبي اللاإرادي
نوعا من انواع الاعتلال العصبي السكري يرتبط مع زيادة معدلات الاعتلال والوفيات
بين هولاء المرضى.
تهدف هذه
الدراسة إلى استقصاء الارتباط المحتمل بين اعتلال الأعصاب الطرفيه الناتج عن مرض
البول السكري و زيادة خطر الحوادث القلبية الوعائية وإيجاد إذا كان هناك أي ارتباط
بين مخاطر القلب والأوعية الدموية لدى مرضى البول السكرى وشدة اعتلال الأعصاب
الطرفية.
وقد تم تقييم خمسة وخمسون مريضا
بداء البول السكرى والتأكد من اصابتهم باعتلال الاعصاب الطرفيه وذلك باستخدام
مقياس متشيجن ومقياس تورونتو وكذلك دراسة سرعة التوصيل العصبي من العصب الربلي
والمأبضية والعصب الزندي. وقد جرى تقسيم المرضى إلى مجموعتين، المجموعة الأولى وهم
المرضى الذين يعانون من الاعتلال العصبي اللاإرادي للقلب والأوعية الدموية: وشملت
23 مريضا، المجموعة الثانية وهم المرضى الذين يعانون من
اعتلال العصاب الطرفية المصاحب لمرض البول السكرى ولا يعانون من الاعتلال العصبي
اللاإرادي للقلب والأوعية الدموية وشملت 32 مريضا.
وقد أظهرت الدراسة أن الاعتلال
العصبي اللاإرادي للقلب والأوعية الدموية يرتبط مع التغيرات الكهربية أثناء أداء
اختبار سرعة التوصيل العصبي، كما يرتبط مع شدة الاعتلال العصبي السكري مقاسا
بمقياس تورونتو ومقياس ميشيجن.
الاستنتاج : زيادة شدة اعتلال
الأعصاب السكري يجب أن يثير شبهة وجود الاعتلال العصبي اللاإرادي لقلب والأوعية
الدموية مما يزيد من احتمال زيادة معدلات الاعتلال و الوفيات بين اولئك المرضى.