4.7 Article

Incidence of retinopathy and nephropathy in youth-onset compared with adult-onset type 2 diabetes

期刊

DIABETES CARE
卷 26, 期 1, 页码 76-81

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/diacare.26.1.76

关键词

-

资金

  1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF DIABETES AND DIGESTIVE AND KIDNEY DISEASES [Z01DK069036, ZIADK069036] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVE - To examine the risk of retinopathy and nephropathy in participants in whom type 2 diabetes was diagnosed in youth (before 20 years of age) compared with those in whom type 2 diabetes was diagnosed at older ages. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - Subjects in whom youth-onset or adult-onset diabetes was diagnosed in the longitudinal study of health in the Pima Indians of Arizona were followed for microvascular complications. Diabetes was diagnosed in 178 subjects before 20 years of age (youth), in 1,359 subjects at 20-39 years of age (younger adults), and in 971 subjects at 40-59 years of age (older adults). Incidence rates of diabetic retinopathy diagnosed by direct ophthalmoscopy through dilated pupils and nephropathy (protein-to-creatinine ratio greater than or equal to0.5 g/g) were calculated by age at diagnosis. RESULTS - Over 25 years, nephropathy developed in 35 of the participants with youth-onset type 2 diabetes; this incidence rate was not significantly different from that in patients with adult-onset diabetes (P = 0.77). Incidence rates of retinopathy, however, were significantly lower for the youth-onset group (P = 0.007). Adjusted for sex, glycemia, and blood pressure risk of retinopathy was lower in patients with youth-onset diabetes than in those with adult-onset diabetes (hazard rate ratio [HRR] 0.42, 95% CI 0.24-0.74, P = 0.003), but risk of nephropathy was not different (HRR 1.2, 95% CI 0.77-1.3, P = 0.38). CONCLUSIONS - In Pima Indians, the risk of nephropathy as a function of duration of diabetes is similar in all age groups. By contrast, the risk of retinopathy is lower in patients with youth-onset type 2 diabetes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据