Literature DB >> 24969581

Corneal confocal microscopy detects neuropathy in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance.

Omar Asghar1, Ioannis N Petropoulos1, Uazman Alam1, Wendy Jones1, Maria Jeziorska1, Andrew Marshall2, Georgios Ponirakis1, Hassan Fadavi1, Andrew J M Boulton1, Mitra Tavakoli1, Rayaz A Malik3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) represents one of the earliest stages of glucose dysregulation and is associated with macrovascular disease, retinopathy, and microalbuminuria, but whether IGT causes neuropathy is unclear. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Thirty-seven subjects with IGT and 20 age-matched control subjects underwent a comprehensive evaluation of neuropathy by assessing symptoms, neurological deficits, nerve conduction studies, quantitative sensory testing, heart rate variability deep breathing (HRVdb), skin biopsy, and corneal confocal microscopy (CCM).
RESULTS: Subjects with IGT had a significantly increased neuropathy symptom profile (P < 0.001), McGill pain index (P < 0.001), neuropathy disability score (P = 0.001), vibration perception threshold (P = 0.002), warm threshold (P = 0.006), and cool threshold (P = 0.03), with a reduction in intraepidermal nerve fiber density (P = 0.03), corneal nerve fiber density (P < 0.001), corneal nerve branch density (P = 0.002), and corneal nerve fiber length (P = 0.05). No significant difference was found in sensory and motor nerve amplitude and conduction velocity or HRVdb.
CONCLUSIONS: Subjects with IGT have evidence of neuropathy, particularly small-fiber damage, which can be detected using skin biopsy and CCM.
© 2014 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24969581      PMCID: PMC4140158          DOI: 10.2337/dc14-0279

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Care        ISSN: 0149-5992            Impact factor:   19.112


Introduction

The association between impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and peripheral neuropathy was first highlighted when subjects with idiopathic small-fiber neuropathy were found to have an unexpectedly high prevalence of IGT (1). Subsequently in the population-based San Luis Valley (2) and Multinational Monitoring of Trends and Determinants in Cardiovascular Disease (MONICA)/Cooperative Health Research in the Region Augsburg (KORA) (3) studies, neuropathy occurred in 26–28% of patients with diabetes, in 11–13% of those with IGT, and in 4–8% of control subjects. In contrast, Dyck et al. (4) did not find an increased prevalence of neuropathy among subjects with impaired glycemia. Establishing neuropathy in IGT is important because it may provide insights into the early pathogenetic components of diabetic neuropathy and highlights that neuropathy may occur with minimal metabolic derangement. The detection of peripheral neuropathy in IGT remains challenging, especially because most of the studies have used a combination of symptoms and neurologic signs that are large-fiber weighted. An increasing body of evidence suggests a predominantly small-fiber neuropathy, with a significant reduction in intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) and minimal large-fiber involvement in subjects with IGT (5). Corneal confocal microscopy (CCM), a novel surrogate measure of small-fiber neuropathy, has been shown to detect early small-fiber damage in diabetic patients (6,7). The purpose of this study was to undertake a comprehensive assessment of neuropathy in subjects with IGT using symptoms and neurological deficits, neurophysiology, quantitative sensory testing, and in particular, skin biopsy and CCM, as sensitive measures of small-fiber neuropathy.

Research Design and Methods

Study Subjects

The study comprised 37 subjects aged 30–75 years with IGT (oral glucose tolerance test: 2-h glucose = 7.8–11.1 mmol/L) and 20 age-matched control subjects with glucose tolerance within normal limits. Subjects with any other cause of peripheral neuropathy, active corneal disease, surgery, or chronic contact lens use were excluded. This research adhered to the tenets of the declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the North Manchester Research Ethics committee. Informed written consent was obtained from all subjects before participation.

Clinical and Peripheral Neuropathy Assessment

All subjects underwent assessment of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, BMI, HbA1c, lipid fractions (total cholesterol, LDL, HDL, and triglycerides), and estimated glomerular filtration rate. Signs and symptoms of neuropathy were assessed using the neuropathy symptom profile, neuropathy disability score, vibration perception threshold (VPT; Horwell Scientific Laboratory Supplies, Wilford, Nottingham, U.K.), and cool (CT) and warm (WT) thresholds (Medoc Ltd., Ramat-Yishai, Israel). Sural sensory nerve amplitude and conduction velocity, and peroneal motor nerve amplitude and conduction velocity were assessed. Heart rate variability deep breathing (HRVdb) was assessed with an ANX 3.0 autonomic nervous system monitoring device (ANSAR Medical Technologies Inc., Philadelphia, PA). Sudomotor function was assessed using Neuropad (miro Verbandstoffe, Wiehl-Drabenderhole, Germany).

Skin Biopsy

A 3-mm punch skin biopsy specimen was obtained from the dorsum of the foot ∼2 cm above the second metatarsal head after local anesthesia (1% lidocaine), and IENFD was quantified in accord with established criteria (8).

CCM

Patients underwent examination with CCM (Heidelberg Engineering GmbH, Heidelberg, Germany), and three established corneal nerve parameters—corneal nerve fiber density (CNFD), corneal nerve branch density (CNBD), and corneal nerve fiber length (CNFL)—were quantified in a masked fashion, as previously described (9).

Statistical Analysis

SPSS for Mac version 19.0 software (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) was used for descriptive and frequency statistics. An unpaired t test (or nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test) was used to study differences between means. All data are expressed as mean ± SEM, and a P < 0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Clinical Assessment

Subjects with IGT and control subjects were matched for age. Subjects with IGT had a significantly greater 2-h glucose level for the oral glucose tolerance test (9.2 ± 1.0 vs. 6.5 ± 0.6 mmol/L, P = 0.001), and they had a higher BMI (31.7 ± 1.0 vs. 27.9 ± 1.2 kg/m2, P = 0.02) and HbA1c (6.0 ± 0.2/43.9 ± 1.0 vs. 5.4 ± 0.1/36.0 ± 0.3 mmol/mol, P < 0.001), with a lower total (4.8 ± 0.2 vs. 5.5 ± 0.2 mmol/L, P = 0.02) and HDL (1.2 ± 0.1 vs. 1.7 ± 0.1 mmol/L, P < 0.001) cholesterol compared with control subjects. There was no difference in systolic/diastolic blood pressure (132/78 vs. 137/79 mmHg, P = 0.5), LDL cholesterol (2.1 ± 1.1 vs. 3.2 ± 0.6 mmol/L, P = 0.1), and triglycerides (2.8 ± 1.0 vs. 1.7 ± 0.9 mmol/L, P = 0.2).

Neuropathy Assessment

The neuropathy symptom profile (4.1 ± 1.0 vs. 0.5 ± 0.2, P < 0.001), the McGill pain index (2.8 ± 0.3 vs. 0.2 ± 0.1, P < 0.001), the neuropathy disability score (2.9 ± 0.5 vs. 0.6 ± 0.2, P = 0.001), VPT (15.9 ± 2.3 vs. 6.5 ± 1.1, P = 0.002), and WT (40.6 ± 0.8 vs. 37.6 ± 0.6, P = 0.006) were significantly increased, whereas CT (24.9 ± 1.3 vs. 27.5 ± 0.6, P = 0.03), neuropad response (71.0 ± 2.8% vs. 93.0 ± 5.6%, P = 0.05), IENFD (6.3 ± 0.6 vs. 9.1 ± 0.7, P = 0.03), CNFD (27.6 ± 1.2 vs. 37.4 ± 1.6, P < 0.001), CNBD (55.8 ± 6.0 vs. 89.2 ± 8.4, P = 0.02), and CNFL (22.1 ± 1.2 vs. 25.7 ± 1.2, P = 0.05) were significantly decreased in the IGT group compared with the control group (Fig. 1). There was no significant difference in sural sensory nerve amplitude (14.0 ± 1.4 vs. 16.6 ± 1.9, P = 0.2) and conduction velocity (49.9 ± 0.9 vs. 49.9 ± 1.0, P = 0.8), in peroneal motor nerve amplitude (4.6 ± 0.4 vs. 5.3 ± 0.5, P = 0.1) and conduction velocity (45.6 ± 0.7 vs. 47.5 ± 0.7, P = 0.1), or in HRVdb (9.5 ± 6.9 vs. 11.9 ± 6.9, P = 0.09).
Figure 1

Skin punch biopsy specimens immunostained for PGP9.5 (A and B) and CCM images (C and D) from a healthy control subject vs. a subject with IGT. The graphs show the distribution of CNFD (E), CNBD (F), and CNFL (G) in control subjects vs. IGT subjects. In C compared with D, a significant reduction in corneal nerve fibers (yellow arrows) and nerve branches (red arrows) is observed, which mirrors the reduction in the same subject in intraepidermal nerve fibers (yellow arrows) reaching the upper levels of epidermis in B compared with A. The subepidermal nerve plexus is also visible (purple arrowhead). Data points in E, F, and G represent actual corneal subbasal nerve parameters in control subjects (n = 20) vs. IGT subjects (n = 37). The purple dashed lines represent group averages, and the blue dashed line in E represents a cutoff for “risk of neuropathy” (IGTN).

Skin punch biopsy specimens immunostained for PGP9.5 (A and B) and CCM images (C and D) from a healthy control subject vs. a subject with IGT. The graphs show the distribution of CNFD (E), CNBD (F), and CNFL (G) in control subjects vs. IGT subjects. In C compared with D, a significant reduction in corneal nerve fibers (yellow arrows) and nerve branches (red arrows) is observed, which mirrors the reduction in the same subject in intraepidermal nerve fibers (yellow arrows) reaching the upper levels of epidermis in B compared with A. The subepidermal nerve plexus is also visible (purple arrowhead). Data points in E, F, and G represent actual corneal subbasal nerve parameters in control subjects (n = 20) vs. IGT subjects (n = 37). The purple dashed lines represent group averages, and the blue dashed line in E represents a cutoff for “risk of neuropathy” (IGTN). Under the assumption that CNFD is normally distributed in controls and IGT (Shapiro-Wilk W test, P > 0.05) and based on a cutoff point of 2 SD from the control average (CNFD = 24.0 no./mm2), subjects with IGT were restratified into two groups: 22 without IGT neuropathy (IGTN; CNFD >24.0 no./mm2) and 15 (40.5%) with IGTN (CNFD <24.0 no./mm2). There was significantly greater self-reported pain intensity (McGill Pain Index, P = 0.04) and reduction in CNBD (P = 0.02) and CNFL (P < 0.001) in subjects with IGTN compared with IGT (Fig. 1).

Conclusions

A recent study has shown a significant reduction in IENFD and abnormal corneal nerve morphology in patients with type 2 diabetes of short duration, suggesting that neuropathy may be an early complication (10), and of course, longitudinal data from the Rochester cohort (11) suggest that duration and severity of exposure to hyperglycemia are related to the severity of neuropathy. In the current study, we show a significant increase in neuropathic symptoms, consistent with the MONICA/KORA Augsburg Surveys (3), which also found a threefold increase in neuropathic pain in subjects with IGT. We also show a significant alteration in sudomotor function, whereas cardiac autonomic function and electrophysiology were normal, similar to a previous study in subjects with IGT demonstrating an abnormal sympathetic skin response but normal results on electrophysiology and standard autonomic function tests (12). These latter findings are similar to a large population-based study that also showed no electrodiagnostic abnormalities in subjects with impaired fasting glucose or IGT (4). However, we demonstrate a significant abnormality in VPT, WT, and CT, similar to the San Luis Valley study (2), which also reported impaired VPT in 11.2% of subjects with IGT compared with 3.5% in control subjects. Previous studies have demonstrated a reduction in IENFD in subjects with IGT, which improved after lifestyle intervention (5), suggesting that this early abnormality may be amenable to treatment. We now confirm a significant reduction in IENFD in subjects with IGT. In addition, we also demonstrate a significant abnormality in corneal nerve morphology using the noninvasive technique of CCM and indeed show that 40.5% of subjects with IGT have significant small-fiber damage based on CNFD reduction. CCM provides a unique opportunity to noninvasively and rapidly assess unmyelinated C fibers in vivo, which has important diagnostic (6) and prognostic (8) implications. In conclusion, this study shows evidence of neuropathy in subjects with IGT, as evidenced by abnormal symptoms, signs, quantitative sensory testing, skin biopsy, and CCM, but not neurophysiology (13).
  13 in total

1.  Rapid automated diagnosis of diabetic peripheral neuropathy with in vivo corneal confocal microscopy.

Authors:  Ioannis N Petropoulos; Uazman Alam; Hassan Fadavi; Andrew Marshall; Omar Asghar; Mohammad A Dabbah; Xin Chen; James Graham; Georgios Ponirakis; Andrew J M Boulton; Mitra Tavakoli; Rayaz A Malik
Journal:  Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci       Date:  2014-04-03       Impact factor: 4.799

2.  Lifestyle intervention for pre-diabetic neuropathy.

Authors:  A Gordon Smith; James Russell; Eva L Feldman; Jonathan Goldstein; Amanda Peltier; Sheldon Smith; Jouhaina Hamwi; Donald Pollari; Billie Bixby; James Howard; J Robinson Singleton
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 19.112

3.  Repeatability of in vivo corneal confocal microscopy to quantify corneal nerve morphology.

Authors:  Ioannis N Petropoulos; Tauseef Manzoor; Philip Morgan; Hassan Fadavi; Omar Asghar; Uazman Alam; Georgios Ponirakis; Mohammad A Dabbah; Xin Chen; James Graham; Mitra Tavakoli; Rayaz A Malik
Journal:  Cornea       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 2.651

4.  Sensory neuropathy in non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. The San Luis Valley Diabetes Study.

Authors:  G M Franklin; L B Kahn; J Baxter; J A Marshall; R F Hamman
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  Why are there no good treatments for diabetic neuropathy?

Authors:  Rayaz A Malik
Journal:  Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol       Date:  2014-04-17       Impact factor: 32.069

6.  Increased prevalence of impaired glucose tolerance in patients with painful sensory neuropathy.

Authors:  J R Singleton; A G Smith; M B Bromberg
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 19.112

7.  The prevalence by staged severity of various types of diabetic neuropathy, retinopathy, and nephropathy in a population-based cohort: the Rochester Diabetic Neuropathy Study.

Authors:  P J Dyck; K M Kratz; J L Karnes; W J Litchy; R Klein; J M Pach; D M Wilson; P C O'Brien; L J Melton; F J Service
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 9.910

8.  Neuropathic pain in diabetes, prediabetes and normal glucose tolerance: the MONICA/KORA Augsburg Surveys S2 and S3.

Authors:  Dan Ziegler; Wolfgang Rathmann; Thorsten Dickhaus; Christa Meisinger; Andreas Mielck
Journal:  Pain Med       Date:  2009-01-16       Impact factor: 3.750

9.  Evaluation of peripheral and autonomic neuropathy among patients with newly diagnosed impaired glucose tolerance.

Authors:  Baris Isak; Buket Oflazoglu; Tulin Tanridag; Irem Yitmen; Onder Us
Journal:  Diabetes Metab Res Rev       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 4.876

10.  Corneal confocal microscopy detects early nerve regeneration in diabetic neuropathy after simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplantation.

Authors:  Mitra Tavakoli; Maria Mitu-Pretorian; Ioannis N Petropoulos; Hassan Fadavi; Omar Asghar; Uazman Alam; Georgios Ponirakis; Maria Jeziorska; Andy Marshall; Nathan Efron; Andrew J Boulton; Titus Augustine; Rayaz A Malik
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  2012-09-21       Impact factor: 9.461

View more
  57 in total

1.  Distal lower limb strength is reduced in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance and is related to elevated intramuscular fat level and vitamin D deficiency.

Authors:  M M Almurdhi; N D Reeves; F L Bowling; A J M Boulton; M Jeziorska; R A Malik
Journal:  Diabet Med       Date:  2016-07-09       Impact factor: 4.359

2.  Small nerve fiber quantification in the diagnosis of diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy: comparing corneal confocal microscopy with intraepidermal nerve fiber density.

Authors:  Xin Chen; Jim Graham; Mohammad A Dabbah; Ioannis N Petropoulos; Georgios Ponirakis; Omar Asghar; Uazman Alam; Andrew Marshall; Hassan Fadavi; Maryam Ferdousi; Shazli Azmi; Mitra Tavakoli; Nathan Efron; Maria Jeziorska; Rayaz A Malik
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2015-03-20       Impact factor: 19.112

3.  Normative values for corneal nerve morphology assessed using corneal confocal microscopy: a multinational normative data set.

Authors:  Mitra Tavakoli; Maryam Ferdousi; Ioannis N Petropoulos; Julie Morris; Nicola Pritchard; Andrey Zhivov; Dan Ziegler; Danièle Pacaud; Kenneth Romanchuk; Bruce A Perkins; Leif E Lovblom; Vera Bril; J Robinson Singleton; Gordon Smith; Andrew J M Boulton; Nathan Efron; Rayaz A Malik
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2015-01-29       Impact factor: 19.112

Review 4.  In vivo corneal confocal microscopy in diabetes: Where we are and where we can get.

Authors:  Ernesto Maddaloni; Francesco Sabatino
Journal:  World J Diabetes       Date:  2016-09-15

5.  A rapid decline in corneal small fibers and occurrence of foot ulceration and Charcot foot.

Authors:  Cirous Dehghani; Anthony W Russell; Bruce A Perkins; Rayaz A Malik; Nicola Pritchard; Katie Edwards; Ayda M Shahidi; Sangeetha Srinivasan; Nathan Efron
Journal:  J Diabetes Complications       Date:  2016-07-16       Impact factor: 2.852

6.  Effect of diet-induced obesity or type 1 or type 2 diabetes on corneal nerves and peripheral neuropathy in C57Bl/6J mice.

Authors:  Matthew S Yorek; Alexander Obrosov; Hanna Shevalye; Amey Holmes; Matthew M Harper; Randy H Kardon; Mark A Yorek
Journal:  J Peripher Nerv Syst       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 3.494

7.  Structured lifestyle intervention in patients with the metabolic syndrome mitigates oxidative stress but fails to improve measures of cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy.

Authors:  Subramaniam Pennathur; Mamta Jaiswal; Anuradha Vivekanandan-Giri; Elizabeth A White; Lynn Ang; David M Raffel; Melvyn Rubenfire; Rodica Pop-Busui
Journal:  J Diabetes Complications       Date:  2017-05-02       Impact factor: 2.852

8.  Individuals with impaired glucose tolerance demonstrate normal cardiac sympathetic innervation using I-123 mIBG scintigraphy.

Authors:  O Asghar; P Arumugam; I S Armstrong; S G Ray; M Schmitt; R A Malik
Journal:  J Nucl Cardiol       Date:  2015-02-20       Impact factor: 5.952

9.  Clinical neuropathy scales in neuropathy associated with impaired glucose tolerance.

Authors:  Lindsay A Zilliox; Sandra K Ruby; Sujal Singh; Min Zhan; James W Russell
Journal:  J Diabetes Complications       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 2.852

Review 10.  Alternatives to the Streptozotocin-Diabetic Rodent.

Authors:  M A Yorek
Journal:  Int Rev Neurobiol       Date:  2016-03-28       Impact factor: 3.230

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.