BACKGROUND: Smoking is associated with a decrease in body weight in patients without diabetes mellitus and an increase in insulin resistance and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Whether smoking is associated with an increase in HbA1c and/or a decrease in body mass index (BMI) in type 2 diabetes mellitus is unresolved, however. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the effect of smoking on HbA1c levels and BMI in a cross-section of outpatients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: A questionnaire was completed by 102 sequential outpatients (32 men, 70 women) with type 2 diabetes mellitus to assess age, sex, duration of diabetes mellitus, medications, exposure to nicotine, medical complications as a result of type 2 diabetes mellitus, and BMI In addition, a urine sample was obtained from each patient to assess the microalbumin-creatinine and cotinine-creatinine ratios. HbA1c level were also obtained from each volunteer as a measure of glucose control. RESULTS: Smokers had significantly higher cotinine-creatinine ratios than nonsmokers. Smokers and nonsmokers did not differ significantly with regard to HbA1c level, BMI, or duration of diabetes mellitus. Smokers were younger than nonsmokers. Smokers and nonsmokers did not differ significantly in terms of microalbumin-creatinine ratio, amount of diabetic medications, or medical complications. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that smoking does not have a significant direct effect on BMI or HbA1c in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This conclusion suggests that the relationship between these factors is much more complex than in people without diabetes or in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus.
BACKGROUND: Smoking is associated with a decrease in body weight in patients without diabetes mellitus and an increase in insulin resistance and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Whether smoking is associated with an increase in HbA1c and/or a decrease in body mass index (BMI) in type 2 diabetes mellitus is unresolved, however. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the effect of smoking on HbA1c levels and BMI in a cross-section of outpatients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: A questionnaire was completed by 102 sequential outpatients (32 men, 70 women) with type 2 diabetes mellitus to assess age, sex, duration of diabetes mellitus, medications, exposure to nicotine, medical complications as a result of type 2 diabetes mellitus, and BMI In addition, a urine sample was obtained from each patient to assess the microalbumin-creatinine and cotinine-creatinine ratios. HbA1c level were also obtained from each volunteer as a measure of glucose control. RESULTS: Smokers had significantly higher cotinine-creatinine ratios than nonsmokers. Smokers and nonsmokers did not differ significantly with regard to HbA1c level, BMI, or duration of diabetes mellitus. Smokers were younger than nonsmokers. Smokers and nonsmokers did not differ significantly in terms of microalbumin-creatinine ratio, amount of diabetic medications, or medical complications. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that smoking does not have a significant direct effect on BMI or HbA1c in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This conclusion suggests that the relationship between these factors is much more complex than in people without diabetes or in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus.
Authors: Ashley L Merianos; Md Monir Hossain; Jane C Khoury; Georg E Matt; E Melinda Mahabee-Gittens Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2018-03-06 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Daniel J Conklin; Suzaynn Schick; Michael J Blaha; Alex Carll; Andrew DeFilippis; Peter Ganz; Michael E Hall; Naomi Hamburg; Tim O'Toole; Lindsay Reynolds; Sanjay Srivastava; Aruni Bhatnagar Journal: Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 4.733
Authors: Rachel J Keith; Mahmoud Al Rifai; Christopher Carruba; Natasha De Jarnett; John W McEvoy; Aruni Bhatnagar; Michael J Blaha; Andrew P Defilippis Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-06-20 Impact factor: 3.240