Key result
The spring constant method identified significantly lower arterial elasticity in type 2 diabetic patients compared to normal controls (723.5 vs 749.3 g/s^2).
Why the study?
Does the spring constant method effectively assess arterial elasticity in type 2 diabetic patients compared to normal controls?
Cross-Sectional (n=132)
No
Does the spring constant method effectively assess arterial elasticity in type 2 diabetic patients compared to normal controls?
The spring constant method derived from the radial arterial pulse is a valid, simple, and noninvasive tool for assessing arterial elasticity and screening for early vascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Supports arterial elasticity screening in type 2 diabetes; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
BACKGROUND: This study tests the validity of a newly-proposed spring constant method to analyze arterial elasticity in type 2 diabetic patients. METHODS: The experimental group comprised 66 participants (36 men and 30 women) ranging between 46 and 86 years of age, all with diabetes mellitus. In the experimental group, 21 participants suffered from atherosclerosis. All were subjected to the measurements of both the carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (cfPWV) and the spring constant method. The comparison (control) group comprised 66 normal participants (37 men and 29 women) with an age range of 40 to 80 years who did not have diabetes mellitus. All control group members were subjected to measurement by the spring constant method. RESULTS: Statistical analysis of the experimental and control groups indicated a significant negative correlation between the spring constant and the cfPWV (P < .001; r = - 0.824 and - 0.71). Multivariate analysis similarly indicated a close relationship. The Student's t test was used to examine the difference in the spring constant parameter between the experimental and control groups. A P-value less than .05 confirmed that the difference between the 2 groups was statistically significant. In receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC), the Area Under Curve (AUC, = 0.85) indicates good discrimination. These findings imply that the spring constant method can effectively identify normal versus abnormal characteristics of elasticity in normal and diabetic participants. CONCLUSIONS: This study verifies the use of the spring constant method to assess arterial elasticity, and found it to be efficient and simple to use. The spring constant method should prove useful not only for improving clinical diagnoses, but also for screening diabetic patients who display early evidence of vascular disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wei et al. (2012) conducted a cross-sectional in Type 2 diabetes mellitus (n=132). Spring constant method vs. Normal participants was evaluated on Spring constant (g/s^2) (p=<0.05). The spring constant method identified significantly lower arterial elasticity in type 2 diabetic patients compared to normal controls (723.5 vs 749.3 g/s^2).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: