Key result
Patients with diabetes and claudication had a lower maximal walking distance on treadmill testing compared to those without diabetes (261 vs 339 m; P<0.05).
Why the study?
Do symptoms and walking capacities differ between claudication patients with and without diabetes during exercise treadmill testing?
Observational (n=1,212)
Do symptoms and walking capacities differ between claudication patients with and without diabetes during exercise treadmill testing?
Absolute Event Rate: 261% vs 339%
p-value: p=<0.05
Patients with diabetes and claudication have more severe objective walking limitations and distal ischemia on treadmill testing than those without diabetes, despite similar self-reported capacities.
Diabetes may worsen objective walking limits in claudication despite similar reports; leaves open diabetes-specific management trials.
AIM: To compare symptoms and walking capacities of patients with and without diabetes reporting vascular-type claudication. METHODS: We recorded self-reported maximal walking distance, maximal walking distance on treadmill test (3.2 km h(-1) , 10% slope), exercise transcutaneous oxygen pressure DROP index [limb transcutaneous oxygen pressure (TcpO2) changes from rest minus chest TcpO2 changes from rest] and symptoms on treadmill in 230 patients with diabetes and 982 patients without diabetes. Exercise-induced proximal and distal symptoms were analysed in the perspective of underlying proximal and distal ischaemia (DROP value < negative 15 mmHg). RESULTS: Self-reported maximal walking distance did not differ between groups, whereas maximal walking distance on treadmill test was lower in patients with diabetes vs. patients without diabetes (261 ± 257 and 339 ± 326 m, respectively; P < 0.05 when adjusted for potential confounders). In patients with ischaemia, the number of ischaemic areas (proximal and/or distal on right and/or left) was comparable between the two groups. Patients with diabetes had more distal ischaemia than patients without diabetes (38 vs. 29%, respectively; P < 0.01), whereas proximal ischaemia was similar between groups. The prevalence of lower-limb exercise-related symptoms without ischaemia was comparable between groups. There were more symptoms other than lower-limb pain in patients with diabetes than patients without diabetes (29.6 vs. 18.3%, respectively; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with diabetes show more severe limitation on the treadmill and more non-limb symptoms than patients without diabetes, although self-reported walking capacity is comparable between the two groups. Using TcpO2, we confirm that patients with diabetes reporting claudication show more distal ischaemia than patients without diabetes, with no difference at the buttock level. Treadmill testing is of interest in patients with peripheral artery disease and diabetes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mahé et al. (2010) conducted an observational in vascular-type claudication (n=1,212). Diabetes vs. No diabetes was evaluated on Maximal walking distance on treadmill test (p=<0.05). Patients with diabetes and claudication had a lower maximal walking distance on treadmill testing compared to those without diabetes (261 vs 339 m; P<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: