| Literature DB >> 32419808 |
Yue Zhao1, Xu Yu1, Yan Lou1, Xinyi Sun1, Boyu Zhu1, Weilong Xu1, Lei Zhou1, Hao Wu2, Qingzi Jin2, Heng Wang3, Jianjiang Shen3, Jiangyi Yu1, Xiaofei An1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of Abelmoschus manihot in treating type 2 diabetic nonproliferative retinopathy.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32419808 PMCID: PMC7210540 DOI: 10.1155/2020/5204917
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Study design and procedure.
Comparisons of demographic characteristics between two groups.
| T group ( | C group ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex (male/female) | 23/17 | 27/13 | 0.36 |
| Age (years) | 61 (52, 64) | 55 (50, 63) | 0.16 |
| DM duration (years) | 10 (5, 15) | 8 (5, 13) | 0.28 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 25.9 ± 3.6 | 26.4 ± 3.3 | 0.48 |
T: treatment; C: control; BMI: body mass index.
Comparisons of case terminations between two groups after treatment.
| T group ( | C group ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total terminated case | 2 (5.0%) | 1 (2.5%) | 1.00 |
| Causes of termination | |||
| Automatic quit | 1 | 1 | 1.00 |
| Poor compliance | 1 | 0 | |
| Drug reaction | 0 | 0 | |
| Adverse events | 0 | 0 |
T: treatment; C: control.
Comparisons of biochemical indicators and blood pressure between two groups before and after treatment.
| T group | C group |
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before ( | After ( | Before ( | After ( | |||
| FBG (mmol/L) | 8.7 ± 2.6 | 7.8 ± 1.9 | 8.2 ± 2.9 | 8.1 ± 2.2 | 0.37 | 0.47 |
| PBG (mmol/L) | 12.7 ± 2.2 | 10.5 ± 2.1 | 11.9 ± 3.0 | 10.8 ± 2.5 | 0.19 | 0.49 |
| HbA1c (%) | 8.8 ± 1.7 | 7.8 ± 1.8 | 9.1 ± 2.4 | 7.8 ± 1.4 | 0.51 | 0.95 |
| TC (mmol/L) | 4.3 ± 1.0 | 4.3 ± 1.0 | 4.1 ± 1.0 | 4.2 ± 1.0 | 0.41 | 0.53 |
| TG (mmol/L) | 1.7 (1.1, 2.4) | 1.5 (1.2, 2.2) | 1.6 (1.1, 2.5) | 1.7 (1.1, 2.2) | 0.77 | 0.74 |
| HDL (mmol/L) | 1.2 ± 0.3 | 1.4 ± 0.3 | 1.2 ± 0.3 | 1.3 ± 0.3 | 0.74 | 0.13 |
| LDL (mmol/L) | 2.7 ± 0.8 | 2.9 ± 0.9 | 2.5 ± 0.8 | 2.8 ± 1.0 | 0.48 | 0.70 |
| ALT (U/L) | 26 (18, 42) | 29 (20, 38) | 30 (19, 40) | 29 (21, 35) | 0.60 | 0.77 |
| AST (U/L) | 22 (17, 27) | 22 (19, 28) | 22 (18, 28) | 23 (20, 29) | 0.42 | 0.56 |
| BUN (mmol/L) | 6.7 ± 2.0 | 6.5 ± 1.5 | 6.2 ± 1.2 | 6.0 ± 1.3 | 0.22 | 0.14 |
| Scr (umol/L) | 67 (60, 81) | 71 (61, 80) | 68 (57, 75) | 70 (58, 76) | 0.61 | 0.50 |
| eGFR (mL/min) | 97.5 ± 25.7 | 98.3 ± 22.1 | 99.8 ± 17.2 | 98.8 ± 16.6 | 0.64 | 0.91 |
| SBP (mmHg) | 128 ± 12 | 129 ± 8 | 126 ± 10 | 130 ± 8 | 0.32 | 0.93 |
| DBP (mmHg) | 75 ± 10 | 77 ± 5 | 76 ± 8 | 78 ± 6 | 0.54 | 0.31 |
T: treatment; C: control; SBP: systolic blood pressure; DBP: diastolic blood pressure; P1: T group vs C group before treatment; P2: T group vs C group after treatment.
Comparisons of NPDR severity between two groups before and after treatment.
| T group | C group |
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before ( | After ( | Before ( | After ( | |||
| Mild | 31 (41.3%) | 42 (59.2%) | 31 (40.2%) | 27 (36.0%) | 0.69 | 0.008∗ |
| Moderate | 31 (41.3%) | 25 (35.2%) | 36 (46.8%) | 35 (46.7%) | ||
| Severe | 13 (17.4%) | 4 (5.6%) | 10 (13.0%) | 13 (17.3%) | ||
T: treatment; C: control; P1: T group vs C group before treatment; P2: T group vs C group after treatment, ∗P ≤ 0.05.
Comparisons of variations of NPDR severity between two groups after treatment.
| T group ( | C group ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Improved | 18 (25.4%) | 7 (9.3%) | 0.01∗ |
| Maintained | 50 (70.4%) | 54 (72.0%) | 0.83 |
| Aggravated | 3 (4.2%) | 14 (18.7%) | 0.007∗ |
T: treatment; C: control; ∗P ≤ 0.05.
Figure 2The typical changes of fundus photographs before and after treatment in the two groups. As indicated by the arrows in the figure, the retinal hemorrhage and exudation in the treatment group were significantly reduced after six months' treatment. In contrast, the retinal hemorrhage and exudation in the control group were significantly increased. T: treatment; C: control.
Comparisons of ETDRS vision score between two groups before and after treatment.
| T group | C group |
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before ( | After ( | Before ( | After ( | |||
| ETDRS score | 73 (67, 79) | 78 (72, 82) | 74 (68, 80) | 72 (67, 80) | 0.26 | <0.001∗ |
T: treatment; C: control; P1: T group vs C group before treatment; P2: T group vs C group after treatment, ∗P ≤ 0.05.
Comparisons of macular thicknesses between two groups before treatment.
| T group ( | C group ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| CAT (um) | 286 (278, 302) | 287 (279, 294) | 0.67 |
| CST (um) | 251 (239, 274) | 250 (240, 266) | 0.78 |
| CV (mm3) | 10.3 (10.0, 10.9) | 10.4 (10.1, 10.6) | 0.62 |
T: treatment; C: control.
Figure 3Comparisons of CAT, CST, CV, and VEGF of two groups before and after treatment. The treatment group's CAT, CST, and CV levels (a, b, and c) were all significantly lower after treatment, and there were no significant differences of control group's CAT, CST, and CV levels before and after treatment. The serum VEGF level (d) in the treatment group was significantly lower after treatment, and there was no significant difference of control group's VEGF before and after treatment. T: treatment; C: control.
Figure 4The typical changes of OCT images and parameters before and after treatment in the two groups. As shown in the figure, the macular thicknesses in the treatment group were significantly lower after six months' treatment. In contrast, the macular thicknesses in the control group were not significantly reduced. T: treatment; C: control.
Comparisons of serum VEGF levels between two groups before and after treatment.
| T group | C group |
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before ( | After ( | Before ( | After ( | |||
| VEGF (ng/ml) | 0.21 (0.14, 0.58) | 0.16 (0.10, 0.23) | 0.21 (0.13, 0.66) | 0.23 (0.12, 0.64) | 1.00 | 0.02∗ |
T: treatment; C: control; P1: T group vs C group before treatment; P2: T group vs C group after treatment, ∗P ≤ 0.05.
Comparisons of hypoglycemic, hypotensive, and other basic treatment drugs between two groups.
| T group ( | C group ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Metformin | 16 | 17 | 0.90 |
| Sulfonylureas | 16 | 12 | 0.30 |
| Glinides | 1 | 0 | 0.49 |
| Acarbose | 18 | 14 | 0.31 |
| Thiazolidinedione | 3 | 3 | 1.00 |
| Insulin | 2 | 0 | 0.24 |
| Insulin-analog | 21 | 23 | 0.74 |
| GLP-1 | 4 | 6 | 0.77 |
| DPP-4 | 12 | 19 | 0.13 |
| SGLT-2 | 3 | 1 | 0.59 |
|
| |||
| CCB | 17 | 11 | 0.13 |
|
| 7 | 9 | 0.61 |
| ACEI | 2 | 1 | 0.98 |
| ARB | 8 | 8 | 0.95 |
| Diuretic | 3 | 4 | 1.00 |
|
| |||
| Aspirin | 7 | 10 | 0.45 |
| Statins | 13 | 19 | 0.20 |
| ARI | 1 | 0 | 0.49 |
T: treatment; C: control; CCB: calcium channel blockers; βRB: β receptor blockers; ACEI: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; ARB: angiotensin II receptor blockers; ARI: aldose reductase inhibitor.