This review finds echocardiography aids early detection of cardiac dysfunction in diabetic patients, suggesting improved prognostic strategies.
The relationship of diabetes mellitus (DM) with cardiovascular mortality and morbidity has been widely established. Diabetic cardiomyopathy (DBCM) has been increasingly recognized as the development of cardiac dysfunction accompanied by heart failure (HF) symptoms in the absence of obvious causes like coronary artery disease (CAD), hypertension (HTN) or valvular diseases. The objective of this review is to critically appraise the role of echocardiography in the diagnosis and prognostic stratification of DBCM. Echocardiography remains the first-line imaging modality due to its availability, repeatability, non-invasive nature and ability to assess structural and functional changes. Classical echocardiographic indices such as left ventricular hypertrophy and systolic and diastolic dysfunction assessment provide valuable information but they lack sensitivity, often remaining normal until advanced stages of DBCM. Recently developed echocardiographic modalities, including strain imaging, myocardial work indices and left atrial strain, may allow for earlier detection of subclinical myocardial dysfunction, having important prognostic implications. However, these advanced modalities require high imaging quality, expertise and standardization, being subject to technical and physio-logical limitations. Stress echocardiography, particularly exercise-based protocols, is an increasingly recognized, valuable tool for unmasking exertional abnormalities in filling pressures, myocardial reserve and pulmonary pressures that are not evident at rest. Until now, stress echocardiography requires validation in large cohorts to assess its prognostic power. This review highlights the importance of timely recognition of DBCM, underscores the advantages and disadvantages of current echocardiographic approaches and outlines future perspectives in multimodality imaging to improve patient outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ioannou et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: