4.7 Article

Early Detection of Nerve Fiber Loss by Corneal Confocal Microscopy and Skin Biopsy in Recently Diagnosed Type 2 Diabetes

期刊

DIABETES
卷 63, 期 7, 页码 2454-2463

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/db13-1819

关键词

-

资金

  1. German Diabetes Center - German Federal Ministry of Health (Berlin, Germany)
  2. Ministry of Innovation, Science, Research and Technology of the state North Rhine-Westphalia (Dusseldorf, Germany)
  3. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF)
  4. Ministry of Science, Research and the Arts of Baden-Wurttemberg [AZ 33-7533-7-11.6-9/3/1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We sought to determine whether early nerve damage may be detected by corneal confocal microscopy (CCM), skin biopsy, and neurophysiological tests in 86 recently diagnosed type 2 diabetic patients compared with 48 control subjects. CCM analysis using novel algorithms to reconstruct nerve fiber images was performed for all fibers and major nerve fibers (MNF) only. Intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) was assessed in skin specimens. Neurophysiological measures included nerve conduction studies (NCS), quantitative sensory testing (QST), and cardiovascular autonomic function tests (AFTs). Compared with control subjects, diabetic patients exhibited significantly reduced corneal nerve fiber length (CNFL-MNF), fiber density (CNFD-MNF), branch density (CNBD-MNF), connecting points (CNCP), IENFD, NCS, QST, and AFTs. CNFD-MNF and IENFD were reduced below the 2.5th percentile in 21% and 14% of the diabetic patients, respectively. However, the vast majority of patients with abnormal CNFD showed concomitantly normal IENFD and vice versa. In conclusion, CCM and skin biopsy both detect nerve fiber loss in recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes, but largely in different patients, suggesting a patchy manifestation pattern of small fiber neuropathy. Concomitant NCS impairment points to an early parallel involvement of small and large fibers, but the precise temporal sequence should be clarified in prospective studies.

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