PURPOSE: To evaluate the relationship between skin autofluorescence (SAF), which reflects the accumulation of advanced glycation end products (AGEs), and the severity of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Sixty-seven eyes of 67 patients with type 2 diabetes were enrolled. Sixty-seven age-matched non-diabetic subjects served as controls. Diabetic patients were classified by the severity of their DR: no DR (NDR), non-proliferative DR (NPDR), and proliferative DR (PDR). SAF was measured with an autofluorescence reader. RESULTS: SAF in the diabetes patients was significantly higher than in the controls (median 2.5 (interquartile range 2.3-2.7) and 1.8 (1.6-2.3) arbitrary unit (AU), respectively, p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant increase in SAF along with the increasing severity of DR (from NDR to NPDR: p = 0.034; NPDR to PDR: p < 0.01). Logistic regression analysis revealed that SAF (OR, 17.2; p < 0.05) was an independent factor indicating the presence of PDR. CONCLUSIONS: SAF has an independent relationship with PDR in patients with type 2 diabetes. SAF measurement with an autofluorescence reader is a non-invasive way to assess the risk of DR. SAF may, therefore, be a surrogate marker candidate for the non-invasive evaluation of DR.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the relationship between skin autofluorescence (SAF), which reflects the accumulation of advanced glycation end products (AGEs), and the severity of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Sixty-seven eyes of 67 patients with type 2 diabetes were enrolled. Sixty-seven age-matched non-diabetic subjects served as controls. Diabeticpatients were classified by the severity of their DR: no DR (NDR), non-proliferative DR (NPDR), and proliferative DR (PDR). SAF was measured with an autofluorescence reader. RESULTS:SAF in the diabetespatients was significantly higher than in the controls (median 2.5 (interquartile range 2.3-2.7) and 1.8 (1.6-2.3) arbitrary unit (AU), respectively, p < 0.001). There was a statistically significant increase in SAF along with the increasing severity of DR (from NDR to NPDR: p = 0.034; NPDR to PDR: p < 0.01). Logistic regression analysis revealed that SAF (OR, 17.2; p < 0.05) was an independent factor indicating the presence of PDR. CONCLUSIONS:SAF has an independent relationship with PDR in patients with type 2 diabetes. SAF measurement with an autofluorescence reader is a non-invasive way to assess the risk of DR. SAF may, therefore, be a surrogate marker candidate for the non-invasive evaluation of DR.
Authors: Malindu E Fernando; Robert G Crowther; Peter A Lazzarini; Kunwarjit S Sangla; Scott Wearing; Petra Buttner; Jonathan Golledge Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2019-06-16
Authors: Jennifer Lopez; William S Gange; Khristina Lung; Benjamin Y Xu; Seth A Seabury; Brian C Toy Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Alicia J Jenkins; Mugdha V Joglekar; Anandwardhan A Hardikar; Anthony C Keech; David N O'Neal; Andrzej S Januszewski Journal: Rev Diabet Stud Date: 2015-08-10