Fu-Shun Pan1, Ming Xu2, Liang Yu3, Jia Luo4, Man-Ying Li5, Jin-Yu Liang6, Yan-Ling Zheng7, Xiao-Yan Xie8. 1. Department of Medical Ultrasonics, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Ultrasound, the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, PR China. Electronic address: panfushun123@163.com. 2. Department of Medical Ultrasonics, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Ultrasound, the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, PR China. Electronic address: xu2004m@sina.com. 3. Department of Vascular and Thyroid Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, 58 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, PR China. Electronic address: yuliang6@mail.sysu.edu.cn. 4. Department of Medical Ultrasonics, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Ultrasound, the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, PR China. Electronic address: luojia7@mail.sysu.edu.cn. 5. Department of Medical Ultrasonics, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Ultrasound, the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, PR China. Electronic address: limany@mail2.sysu.edu.cn. 6. Department of Medical Ultrasonics, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Ultrasound, the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, PR China. Electronic address: awayfish@163.com. 7. Department of Medical Ultrasonics, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Ultrasound, the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, PR China. Electronic address: zhyanl@mail.sysu.edu.cn. 8. Department of Medical Ultrasonics, Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Ultrasound, the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, 58 Zhongshan Road 2, Guangzhou, 510080, PR China. Electronic address: xxy1992sys@163.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the relationship between carotid stiffness and carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Carotid properties were evaluated in 317 consecutive subjects (98 volunteers for controls, 105 patients with normal CIMT for T2DM group 1, and 114 patients with thickened CIMT for T2DM group 2). The CIMT and carotid pulse wave velocity at the beginning (PWV-BS) and at the end of systole (PWV-ES) were measured. RESULTS: Apart from PWV-BS in T2DM group 1, CIMT and PWV-ES were significant higher in patients groups than those of in controls. In multiple regression analysis, diabetes was independently associated with PWV-ES and not with PWV-BS. Moreover, when adjusting for baseline covariates, only PWV-ES (odds ratio = 4.27, P < 0.001) distinguished carotid in T2DM group 1 from that of controls. Concerning the relationship between log(CIMT) and PWV-ES, when adjusting for baseline covariates, the association were still significant in controls and T2DM group 1, whereas it was no longer present in T2DM group 2 (P = 0.091). Additionally, the slope (β) after adjustment for the PWV-ES to log(CIMT) was significantly steeper in T2DM group 1 than that of in controls (β= 8.35 vs. 3.31, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The PWV-ES seem to be a better biomarker candidate than PWV-BS to assess the carotid stiffness in diabetic patients. Compared with controls, diabetic patients showed more advanced functional changes than morphological changes despite normal CIMT, whereas the relationship trend was not present when thickened CIMT emerged.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the relationship between carotid stiffness and carotid intima-media thickness (CIMT) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Carotid properties were evaluated in 317 consecutive subjects (98 volunteers for controls, 105 patients with normal CIMT for T2DM group 1, and 114 patients with thickened CIMT for T2DM group 2). The CIMT and carotid pulse wave velocity at the beginning (PWV-BS) and at the end of systole (PWV-ES) were measured. RESULTS: Apart from PWV-BS in T2DM group 1, CIMT and PWV-ES were significant higher in patients groups than those of in controls. In multiple regression analysis, diabetes was independently associated with PWV-ES and not with PWV-BS. Moreover, when adjusting for baseline covariates, only PWV-ES (odds ratio = 4.27, P < 0.001) distinguished carotid in T2DM group 1 from that of controls. Concerning the relationship between log(CIMT) and PWV-ES, when adjusting for baseline covariates, the association were still significant in controls and T2DM group 1, whereas it was no longer present in T2DM group 2 (P = 0.091). Additionally, the slope (β) after adjustment for the PWV-ES to log(CIMT) was significantly steeper in T2DM group 1 than that of in controls (β= 8.35 vs. 3.31, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The PWV-ES seem to be a better biomarker candidate than PWV-BS to assess the carotid stiffness in diabeticpatients. Compared with controls, diabeticpatients showed more advanced functional changes than morphological changes despite normal CIMT, whereas the relationship trend was not present when thickened CIMT emerged.
Authors: Yihao Zheng; Brian J Thelen; Nirmala Rajaram; Venkataramu N Krishnamurthy; James Hamilton; Miguel Angel Funes-Lora; Timothy Morgan; Lenar Yessayan; Brandie Bishop; Nickolas Osborne; Peter Henke; Albert J Shih; William F Weitzel Journal: Ann Biomed Eng Date: 2021-08-11 Impact factor: 3.934