Search

Background: COVID-19 entails a higher rate of complications in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Likewise, COVID-19 infection can cause alterations in glucose metabolism that may lead to worse control. The aim of the study was to analyse the perceptions of a large group of Spanish physicians about the relationship between COVID-19 and T2DM, as well as the management, monitoring, and treatment of both diseases. Methods: A cross-sectional multicenter national project was conducted based on a survey which included opinion, attitude, and behavior (OAB) questions. Physicians specialised in internal medicine or endocrinology, whose usual clinical practices included the management of T2DM, responded to the survey between March and April 2021. Results: A total of 112 participants responded to the survey, from which 64.3% believed that COVID-19 entailed a higher risk of glycaemic decompensation irrespective of the presence of previously known T2DM. Obesity was considered a risk factor for poor control of T2DM by 57.7% and for a worse course of COVID-19 by 61.0%. Treatment intensification in not-on-target patients was considered by 57.1% in the presence of COVID-19 and by 73.2% in the absence of COVID-19. No participants considered the suspension of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) in ambulatory patients, 85.7% declared that this therapeutic approach in hospitalized patients should be kept, and 88.4% supported the option of maintaining DPP-4i when corticosteroids were prescribed. Conclusion: The physicians involved in the management of T2DM and COVID-19 are aware of the bidirectional relationship between both conditions. However, the monitoring and therapeutic management of patients with T2DM who are infected by SARS-CoV-2 needs improvement through the following of the current recommendations and available evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Acute hyperglycemia has been associated with worse prognosis in patients hospitalized for heart failure (HF). Nevertheless, studies evaluating the impact of glycemic control on long-term prognosis have shown conflicting results. Our aim was to assess the relationship between acute-to-chronic (A/C) glycemic ratio and 4-year mortality in a cohort of subjects hospitalized for acute HF. A total of 1062 subjects were consecutively included. We measured glycaemia at admission and estimated average chronic glucose levels and the A/C glycemic ratio were calculated. Subjects were stratified into groups according to the A/C glycemic ratio tertiles. The primary endpoint was 4-year mortality. Subjects with diabetes had higher risk for mortality compared to those without (HR 1.35 [95% CI: 1.10–1.65]; p = 0.004). A U-shape curve association was found between glucose at admission and mortality, with a HR of 1.60 [95% CI: 1.22–2.11]; p = 0.001, and a HR of 1.29 [95% CI: 0.97–1.70]; p = 0.078 for the first and the third tertile, respectively, in subjects with diabetes. Additionally, the A/C glycemic ratio was negatively associated with mortality (HR 0.76 [95% CI: 0.58–0.99]; p = 0.046 and HR 0.68 [95% CI: 0.52–0.89]; p = 0.005 for the second and third tertile, respectively). In multivariable analysis, the A/C glycemic ratio remained an independent predictor. In conclusion, in subjects hospitalized for acute HF, the A/C glycemic ratio is significantly associated with mortality, improving the ability to predict mortality compared with glucose levels at admission or average chronic glucose concentrations, especially in subjects with diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity, mortality, and hospital admissions. This study aimed to analyze how the differences in delivered care (variability of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) achieved targets) affect hospital admissions for cardiovascular events (CVEs) in T2D patients. Methods: We analyzed the electronic records in primary care health centers at Navarra (Spain) and hospital admission for CVEs. We followed 26,435 patients with T2D from 2012 to 2016. The variables collected were age, sex, health center, general practitioner practice (GPP), and income. The clinical variables were diagnosis of T2D, weight, height, body mass index (BMI), blood pressure (BP), HbA1c, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), smoking, and antecedents of CVEs. We calculated, in each GPP practice, the proportion of patients with HbA1c ≥ 9. A non-hierarchical K-means cluster analysis classified GPPs into two clusters according to the level of compliance with HbA1C ≥ 9% control indicators. We used logistic and Cox regressions. Results: T2D patients had a higher probability of admission for CVEs when they belonged to a GPP in the worst control cluster of HbA1C ≥ 9% (HR = 1.151; 95% CI, 1.032–1.284). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is the leading cause of polyneuropathy in the Western world. Diabetic neuropathy (DNP) is the most common complication of diabetes and is of great clinical significance mainly due to the pain and the possibility of ulceration in the lower limbs. Early detection of neuropathy is essential in the medical management of this complication. Early unmyelinated C-fiber dysfunction is one of the typical findings of diabetic neuropathy and the first clinical manifestation of dysfunction indicating sudomotor eccrine gland impairment. In order to assess newly developed technology for the measurement of dermal electrochemical conductance (DEC), we analyzed the feasibility and effectiveness of DEC (quantitative expression of sudomotor reflex) as a screening test of DNP in primary health care centers. The study included 197 people (with type 2 diabetes, prediabetes and normal tolerance) who underwent all the protocol tests and electromyography (EMG). On comparing DEC with EMG as the gold standard, the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC, area under the curve) was 0.58 in the whole sample, AUC = 0.65 in the diabetes population and AUC = 0.72 in prediabetes, being irrelevant in subjects without glucose disturbances (AUC = 0.47). Conclusions: In usual clinical practice, DEC is feasible, with moderate sensitivity but high specificity. It is also easy to use and interpret and requires little training, thereby making it a good screening test in populations with diabetes and prediabetes. It may also be useful in screening general populations at risk of neuropathy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]