| Literature DB >> 36168428 |
Amira El Tantawy1, Ghada Anwar2, Reem Esmail1, Hanan Zekri1, Samar Mahmoud3, Nancy Samir3, Amr Fathalla1, Mary Maher3, Antoine F AbdelMassih1.
Abstract
Type 1 diabetes is a major cause of cardiovascular death; diabetic cardiomyopathy (DCM) is the most important cause of mortality among diabetic patients. There is an increasing body of evidence that the most important inducer of DCM is microvascular injury. The aim of this study is to establish a potential relationship between low frequency/high frequency (LF/HF) ratio and DCM and to set a possible predictive cutoff of LF:HF ratio for early detection of DCM.Entities:
Keywords: cardiac autonomic neuropathy; diabetic cardiomyopathy; speckle tracking echocardiography; tissue doppler
Year: 2022 PMID: 36168428 PMCID: PMC9509180 DOI: 10.1097/XCE.0000000000000272
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiovasc Endocrinol Metab ISSN: 2574-0954
Demographic and clinical parameters of cases vs. controls
| Parameters | Patients | Control | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | ±SD | Mean | ±SD | ||
| Age (year) | 12.19 | 2.37 | 11.34 | 2.17 | 0.235 |
| Weight (kg) | 44.77 | 13.81 | 44.85 | 10.27 | 0.976 |
| Height (cm) | 146.89 | 14.03 | 147.62 | 11.09 | 0.786 |
| BMI (kg/m²) | 20.19 | 3.34 | 20.19 | 1.99 | 0.999 |
| SBP (mmHg) | 115.62 | 11.5 | 104.14 | 9.81 | |
| DBP (mmHg) | 77.04 | 8.33 | 68.42 | 5.65 | |
| HR | 87.8 | 7.06 | 90.57 | 16.34 | 0.218 |
HR, heart rate.
*P < 0.05 = significant.
Comparison between heart rate variability data in patients and controls
| Parameters | Patients | Controls | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | ±SD | Mean | ±SD | ||
| Average RR (ms) | 683.85 | 71.96 | 641.60 | 83.79 | 0.008 |
| SDNN (ms) | 43.86 | 18.98 | 93.85 | 27.58 | 0.04 |
| PNN50% | 14.7 | 16.06 | 17.97 | 14.77 | 0.311 |
| RMSSD (ms) | 39.13 | 24.69 | 62.34 | 30.82 | |
| LF/HF | 1.95 | 0.6 | 0.92 | 0.14 | |
Average RR, normal R- R intervals; HF, high frequency 0.15–0.40 Hz, LF/HF ratio; LF, low frequency 0.04–0.15 Hz., PNN50%, the number of instances per hour in which two consecutive R-R intervals differ by more than 50 ms; RMSSD, root mean square of the difference of successive R-R intervals; SDNN, SD of all normal R- R intervals.
*P < 0.05 = significant.
Comparison between M-mode echocardiography data of patients and controls
| Parameters | Patients | Controls | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | ±SD | Mean | ±SD | ||
| MM derived FS% | 37.91 | 6.05 | 38.65 | 5.60 | 0.55 |
| MM derived EF% | 75.46 | 7.82 | 74.94 | 8.06 | 0.752 |
| MM derived LVEDVI | 71.66 | 4.53 | 69.74 | 4.73 | 0.67 |
| TAPSE (mm) | 19.40 | 3.16 | 20.05 | 3.74 | |
| E/E’ Tricuspid annular | 8.2 | 0.51 | 6.2 | 0.32 | |
| LV E/E’ | 9.11 | 3.94 | 7.08 | 0.88 | |
| Deceleration time | 182 | 11 | 150 | 7 | 0.000 |
| LA volume index | 37 | 2 | 31 | 1 | 0.000 |
EF, ejection fraction; FS%, fractional shortening; LA, left atrium; LVEDVI, left ventricular end-diastolic volume index; LV E/E’, ratio of transmitral early inflow velocity to average early diastolic basal septal and mitral annular velocities; MM, motion mode; TAPSE, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, Tricuspid annular E/E’, Ratio of early tricuspid inflow velocity to early diastolic tricuspid annular velocity.
*P < 0.05 = significant.
Correlation between laboratory data and echocardiographic data (tissue Doppler imaging) and most relevant heart rate variability data in diabetic patients.
| Parameters | E/E’ (tricuspid annular) | LV E/E’ | Deceleration Time | LA volume | LF/HF | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
| HbA1C% | −0.177 | 0.129 | 0.247 | 0.06 | 0.28 | 0.063 | 0.18 | 0.08 | 0.602 | 0.000 |
| Cholesterol (mg/dl) | −0.325 | 0.06 | 0.235 | 0.08 | 0.22 | 0.07 | 0.26 | 0.23 | 0.422 | 0.000 |
| LDL (mg/dl) | −0.281 | 0.07 | 0.233 | 0.06 | 0.13 | 0.08 | 0.16 | 0.43 | 0.528 | 0.000 |
| HDL (mg/dl) | −0.215 | 0.064 | 0.091 | 0.435 | 0.19 | 0.12 | 0.23 | 0.07 | 0.208 | 0.073 |
| TG (mg/dl) | −0.359 | 0.08 | 0.229 | 0.07 | 0.25 | 0.09 | 0.33 | 0.06 | 0.467 | 0.000 |
| Alb/cr ratio | −0.166 | 0.155 | 0.267 | 0.08 | 0.22 | 0.19 | 0.27 | 0.26 | 0.378 | 0.04 |
HbA1c, glycosylated hemoglobin; HDL, high density lipoprotein; HF, high frequency 0.15–0.40 Hz, LDL, low density lipoprotein; LF, low frequency 0.04–0.15 Hz; LF/HF, ratio of LF and HF; LV E/E’, ratio of transmitral early inflow velocity to average early diastolic basal septal and mitral annular velocities; TG, triglycerides; mg/dl, milligram per deciliter; Tricuspid annular E/E’, ratio of early tricuspid inflow velocity to early diastolic tricuspid annular velocity.
*P < 0.05 = significant.
Fig. 1Scatter plot showing the relationship between LF/HF ratio and LV E/E’ ratio. HF, high frequency; LF, low frequency; LV E/E’, Ratio of early transmitral inflow and average early diastolic mitral annular and basal septal velocities.
Fig. 2Scatter plot showing the relationship between LF/HF ratio and LV DT. HF, high frequency; LF, low frequency; LV DT, deceleration time.
Fig. 3Scatter plot showing the relationship between LF/HF ratio and LA volume index. HF, high frequency; LF, low frequency; LA, left atrium.
Fig. 4Interactive dot diagram showing the predictive value of LF/HF ratio in predicting LV diastolic dysfunction as expressed by LV E/E’ ratio. HF, high frequency; LF, low frequency; LV E/E’, Ratio of early transmitral inflow and average early diastolic mitral annular and basal septal velocities. 0. No diastolic dysfunction, 1, diastolic dysfunction.