Cardiac autonomic nervous system dysfunction has been implicated in several different
pathological scenarios with a wide range of clinical relevance and risk. Early detection
of autonomic changes, either provoked for therapeutic purposes[1] or as a complication of a primary disorder, such as
diabetes mellitus (DM) is of essence for the best management of patients.Classic (linear) analysis of heart rate variability (HRV) has been routinely used to
assess autonomic behavior in diabeticpatients in order to promptly detect
neuropathy,[2] one of the most
common and overlooked complications and a significant cardiovascular risk factor.As the linear analysis provides important data, non-linear indexes of HRV have been
proposed as well, emerging as potential ancillary tools to investigate dysautonomia in
type 1 and 2 DM. In the paper “Nonlinear Dynamics in young people with
diabetes”,[3] the authors
compared linear and nonlinear indexes and studied their correlation. While symbolic
analysis presented partial correlation with linear methods, Shannon entropy index was
similar in DM individuals and controls, and these findings raise two important
issues:What could be the clinical value of determining the complexity and randomness
of HRV by nonlinear methods?Are they sensitive and efficient?Several authors agreed that linear indexes (time and frequency domains) are simple and
reproducible methods to evaluate the cardiac autonomic system and are consistently
reduced in diabeticpatients.[2-7] The observed lack of correlation of
nonlinear methods with standard measures may imply low sensitivity, and it stands in
disagreement with Javorka et al.,[4]
which claim that “The complexity of HRV appears to be even more affected (in DMpatients) than the magnitude of HRV that is commonly assessed by cardiac autonomic
tests.”On the other hand, a perfect correlation between nonlinear techniques and standard HRV
measures would provide only limited additional diagnostic information. In fact, previous
authors verified that linear HRV indexes performed even better than most complexity
measures in discriminating DMpatients from controls.[4]So, where do we stand on the noninvasive diagnosis of dysautonomia?To the best of our knowledge, time and frequency domain indexes remain the most accepted
and used methods to assess HRV. Nonlinear measures are potential tools, but to reach
optimal HRV assessment, the methods must be standardized: it is possible to find studies
with 24-hour,[8] medium-term
(~1h),[4,7] ultra short-term (<5 min)[9] and short-term (from 5-10 min)[2,5,6,10] data recording
indexes, all of them dealing with noninterchangeable information.Nonlinear methods’ contribution to evaluate diabetic autonomic system dysfunction is yet
to be demonstrated by large-scale comparison studies. Once complexity evaluation proves
its value, however, one last question will remain: to what extent would it help patients
prevent diabetic neuropathy progression?
Authors: James E Skinner; Daniel N Weiss; Jerry M Anchin; Zuzana Turianikova; Ingrid Tonhajzerova; Jana Javorkova; Kamil Javorka; Mathias Baumert; Michal Javorka Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2011-01-21 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Stefano Guzzetti; Ester Borroni; Pietro E Garbelli; Elisa Ceriani; Paolo Della Bella; Nicola Montano; Chiara Cogliati; Virend K Somers; Alberto Malliani; Alberto Mallani; Alberto Porta Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-07-18 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Naiara M Souza; Thais R Giacon; Francis L Pacagnelli; Marianne P C R Barbosa; Vitor E Valenti; Luiz C M Vanderlei Journal: Cardiol Young Date: 2016-02-03 Impact factor: 1.093
Authors: Mamta Jaiswal; Elaine M Urbina; R Paul Wadwa; Jennifer W Talton; Ralph B D'Agostino; Richard F Hamman; Tasha E Fingerlin; Stephen Daniels; Santica M Marcovina; Lawrence M Dolan; Dana Dabelea Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2012-09-06 Impact factor: 19.112