Prospective study assesses magnesium levels correlated with vascular complications in type 2 diabetes, suggesting clinical relevance.
Objective: The objective of this study was to assess serum magnesium levels in individuals with type 2 diabetes with established microvascular complications and to correlate it with the severity of vascular complications. Methodology: A prospective analytical cross-sectional study among 100 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with microvascular complications in the diabetology department of a tertiary care hospital in Chennai, India, was conducted. Serum magnesium levels were assessed and correlated with the severity of microvascular complications and the presence of macrovascular complications. Results: The mean age of participants was 58.8 years, and the duration of diabetes was 13.5 years. The mean fasting plasma glucose was 203.6 mg/dl, and the mean serum magnesium level was 0.70 ± 0.14 mmol/L. Forty-three percent had normal magnesium levels, 19% had levels at the lower limit of normal (0.7 mmol/L), and 38% had deficiency (<0.7 mmol/L). A statistically significant association was seen between serum magnesium deficiency and diabetic retinopathy ( P < 0.001), nephropathy ( P < 0.001), and coronary artery disease (CAD) ( P = 0.030). Among those with proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR), magnesium deficiency was present in 42.1% compared to 2.3% with normal levels. Hypomagnesemia was seen in 39.5% with Stages 3 and 4 nephropathy, and in those with normal levels of magnesium, no one belonged to Stage 3 or 4 nephropathy. A higher prevalence of CAD was seen among individuals with magnesium deficiency (21.1%) compared to those with normal serum magnesium levels (7.0%). Conclusion: This study demonstrates a high prevalence of magnesium deficiency in patients with T2DM and microvascular complications and establishes a strong inverse association between serum magnesium levels and the severity of diabetic retinopathy, nephropathy, and CAD.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Saravanan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: