| Literature DB >> 26719776 |
Mustafa Unubol1, Irfan Yavasoglu2, Firuzan Kacar3, Engin Guney1, Imran Kurt Omurlu4, Mevlut Ture4, Gurhan Kadikoylu2, Zahit Bolaman2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Myeloperoxidase (MPO) is a lysosomal hemoprotein found in the azurophilic granules in neutrophils. Myeloperoxidase plays an important role in oxygen-dependent killing of bacteria, fungi, virus and malignant cells. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is listed among conditions that may lead to secondary MPO deficiency in neutrophils but inconsistent results concerning MPO activity in diabetic patients have been reported in the literature. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the relationship between glycemic control in patients with type 2 DM and MPO activity in neutrophils from a histochemical perspective.Entities:
Keywords: Diabetes mellitus; Diabetic complications; Glycemic control; Myeloperoxidase activity
Year: 2015 PMID: 26719776 PMCID: PMC4696277 DOI: 10.1186/s13098-015-0115-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Diabetol Metab Syndr ISSN: 1758-5996 Impact factor: 3.320
Fig. 1Microscopic image of the neutrophil with positive MPO staining in peripheral blood
Comparison of laboratory findings between the three groups
| DM with poor glycemic control | DM with good glycemic control | Controls | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MPO (%) | 70 (58.5–80)a | 80 (73.75–90) | 88 (78–92) | <0.001b |
| Hb (g/dL) | 13.34 ± 1.63 | 13.52 ± 1.30 | 12.7 ± 1.47 | >0.05c |
| Leukocyte (/mm3) | 7961 ± 1624.48 | 7963.67 ± 1624.30 | 6608.71 ± 1411.78d | 0.001c |
| Platelet (/mm3) | 287375 ± 81599 | 280567 ± 72463 | 275968 ± 72470 | >0.05c |
| HBA1C (%) | 10.15 (8.8–13.85) | 6.5 (5.98–6.8)e | 5.4 (5–5.5) | <0.001b |
| LDL (mg/dL) | 124.48 ± 42.32 | 113.63 ± 27.40 | 127.39 ± 31.67 | >0.05c |
| HDL (mg/dL) | 39.85 ± 11.98f | 46.73 ± 11.91 | 46.29 ± 10.19 | 0.019c |
| Triglyceride (mg/dL) | 138.5 (110.75–192.75) | 137.5 (103.5–209.25) | 120 (87–190) | >0.05b |
| Creatinine (mg/dL) | 0.77 (0.72–0.93)a | 0.72 (0.65–0.8) | 0.73 (0.68–0.8) | 0.021b |
| Fasting plasma glucose (mg/dL) | 203.5 (156–304.5) | 122 (97.75–128.25)e | 90 (85–93) | <0.001b |
| Postprandial plasma glucose (mg/dL) | 298 (225–397.75) | 147.5 (125.5–167.75)e | 104 (95–120) | <0.001b |
| Sedimentation (mm/h) | 42.13 ± 22.27g | 36.77 ± 18.31 | 26.48 ± 16.45 | 0.005c |
| C-reactive protein (g/dl) | 3.41 (2.09–7.36)a | 1.35 (0.7–3.85) | 1.38 (0.94–3.63) | 0.001b |
| Age | 56.4 ± 9.99 | 57.3 ±10.02 | 51.42 ± 11.48 | >0.05c |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 29.45 (26.60–35.65) | 27.88 (24.5–32.43) | 25 (23.6–27.8)d | 0.001b |
| MPV (fL) | 9.4 (8.5–10.2) | 8.4 (7.58–9.63) | 8.9 (8.5–9.7) | >0.05b |
| Hematocrite | 39.35 (37.25–42.18) | 40.6 (38.58–43.03) | 36.7 (35.6–41.5)h | 0.036b |
| 24-h urine microalbuminuria (mg/day) | 38 (16.25–88.25) | 17 (12–29.25)e | 12 (8–15) | <0.001b |
aDM group with poor control is different from other groups
bIt was used the Kruskal–Wallis test for statistical analysis
cIt was used the ANOVA test for statistical analysis
dControl group is different from other groups
eAll groups are different from each other
fDM group with poor control and DM group with good control are different from each other
gDM group with poor control and control group are different from each other
hControl group and DM group with good control are different from each other
Comparison of neuropathy presence and laboratory data in patients with type 2 DM
| With neuropathy | Without neuropathy | Controls | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MPO (%) | 75 (50–86)a | 80 (70–90) | 87 (79.5–90.5) | 0.011b |
| HBA1C (%) | 9 (6.9–12.3)c | 6.75 (5.6–9.75) | 5.4 (5.08–5.5) | <0.001b |
| Sedimentation (mm/h) | 43.96 ± 21.89d | 32.87 ± 20.16 | 31.05 ± 16.27 | 0.036e |
| C-reactive protein (g/dl) | 4.1 (2.39–8.87)d | 1.95 (0.83–3.88) | 1.37 (0.93–4.45) | 0.002b |
aThe group with neuropathy and the control group are different from each other
bIt was used the Kruskal–Wallis test for statistical analysis
cAll groups are different from each other
dThe group with neuropathy is different from other groups
eIt was used the ANOVA test for statistical analysis
Comparison of nephropathy development and laboratory data in patients with type 2 DM
| With nephropathy | Without nephropathy | Controls | p | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MPO (%) | 80 (70–85) | 75 (54–88) | 88 (78–92)a | 0.003b |
| HBA1C (%) | 9 (7.1–12) | 6.9 (6.15–10.8) | 5.4 (5–5.5)a | <0.001b |
| Sedimentation (mm/h) | 38 ± 21.25 | 40.39 ± 20.63 | 26.48 ± 16.45c | 0.011d |
| C-reactive protein (g/dl) | 3.44 (1.5–7.93) | 2.41 (0.99–4.1) | 1.38 (0.94–3.63)e | 0.024b |
aControl group is different from other groups
bIt was used the Kruskal–Wallis test for statistical analysis
cControl group and the group without nephropathy are different from each other
dIt was used the ANOVA test for statistical analysis
eControl group and the group with nephropathy are different from each other
Comparison of complications presence in patients with type 2 DM
| Controls n (%) | DM with poor control n (%) | DM with good control n (%) | Exact p | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | Male | 8 (25.8) | 21 (52.5) | 11 (36.7) | >0.05a |
| Female | 23 (74.2) | 19 (47.5) | 19 (63.3) | ||
| Neuropathy | No | 20 (50) | 23 (76.7) | <0.001a | |
| Yes | 20 (50) | 7 (23.3) | |||
| CAD | No | 32 (80) | 28 (93.3) | <0.001a | |
| Yes | 8 (20) | 2 (6.7) | |||
| Retinopathy | No | 31 (77.5) | 28 (93.3) | <0.001a | |
| Yes | 9 (22.5) | 2 (6.7) | |||
| PAH | No | 38 (95) | 29 (96.7) | <0.001a | |
| Yes | 2 (5) | 1 (3.3) | |||
| Diabetic foot | No | 38 (95) | 30 (100) | >0.05a | |
| Yes | 2 (5) | 0 (0) | |||
Fisher test were used in analyzing categorical variables and descriptive statistics were expressed as frequency (%)
It was used the Chi square test for statistical analysis
Fig. 2Correlation between HbA1c and MPO in patients with DM
Fig. 3Correlation between HbA1c and MPO in all groups