Aline Fofonka1, Patrícia Martins Bock2, Karina Rabello Casali3, Anderson Donelli da Silveira4, Felipe Marques da Rosa5, Gabriela Berlanda6, Beatriz D Schaan7. 1. Post-Graduate Program in Cardiology, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2400 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil; Universidade Luterana do Brasil, Avenida Itacolomi, 3600 Gravataí, RS, Brazil. 2. National Institute of Science and Technology for Health Technology Assessment (IATS) - CNPq/Brazil, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2350 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil; Faculdades Integradas de Taquara, Avenida Oscar Martins Rangel, 4500 Taquara, RS, Brazil. Electronic address: patriciabock74@gmail.com. 3. Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Department of Science and Technology, Rua Talim, 330 São José dos Campos, SP, Brazil. 4. Post-Graduate Program in Cardiology, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2400 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. Electronic address: adsilveira@hcpa.edu.br. 5. Universidade Luterana do Brasil, Avenida Itacolomi, 3600 Gravataí, RS, Brazil. 6. Post-Graduate Program in Endocrinology, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2400 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. Electronic address: gberlanda@hcpa.edu.br. 7. Post-Graduate Program in Cardiology, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2400 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil; National Institute of Science and Technology for Health Technology Assessment (IATS) - CNPq/Brazil, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, 2350 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil. Electronic address: bschaan@hcpa.edu.br.
Abstract
AIMS: To evaluate the glucose variability, oxidative stress, metabolic and cardiovascular responses after an aerobic exercise session in diabetic patients on treatment with metformin plus vildagliptin or glibenclamide. METHODS: Parallel clinical trial including patients with type 2 diabetes treated withmetformin plus vildagliptin or glibenclamidefor 12 weeks. Glucose variability, oxidative stress, metabolic (plasma glucose, insulin and glucagon-like-peptide-1) and cardiovascular responses were evaluated at rest, during and after a 30 min aerobic exercise session (70% of the peak heart rate). RESULTS:Thirteen patients were included, seven in vildagliptin group (METV) and six in glibenclamide group (METG), baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 8.8 ± 0.3%. Treatment reduced HbA1c (1.2% and 1.5% for METV and METG, respectively). The aerobic exercise session did not change glucose variability in both groups. A decrease in glucose during exercise recovery was found, with area under the curve lower in the METG vs. METV (p = 0.04). After the intervention, systolic blood pressure (SBP) decreased in both groups. Patients treated with vildagliptin showed lower SBP variability compared to those treated with glibenclamide. CONCLUSIONS: Besides improvement in glucose control and reduction of SBP obtained by both treatments, lower blood pressure variability was observed in patients receiving vildagliptin. Glucose variability remained unaffected by both interventions and the exercise session.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To evaluate the glucose variability, oxidative stress, metabolic and cardiovascular responses after an aerobic exercise session in diabeticpatients on treatment with metformin plus vildagliptin or glibenclamide. METHODS: Parallel clinical trial including patients with type 2 diabetes treated with metformin plus vildagliptin or glibenclamide for 12 weeks. Glucose variability, oxidative stress, metabolic (plasma glucose, insulin and glucagon-like-peptide-1) and cardiovascular responses were evaluated at rest, during and after a 30 min aerobic exercise session (70% of the peak heart rate). RESULTS: Thirteen patients were included, seven in vildagliptin group (METV) and six in glibenclamide group (METG), baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 8.8 ± 0.3%. Treatment reduced HbA1c (1.2% and 1.5% for METV and METG, respectively). The aerobic exercise session did not change glucose variability in both groups. A decrease in glucose during exercise recovery was found, with area under the curve lower in the METG vs. METV (p = 0.04). After the intervention, systolic blood pressure (SBP) decreased in both groups. Patients treated with vildagliptin showed lower SBP variability compared to those treated with glibenclamide. CONCLUSIONS: Besides improvement in glucose control and reduction of SBP obtained by both treatments, lower blood pressure variability was observed in patients receiving vildagliptin. Glucose variability remained unaffected by both interventions and the exercise session.