Why the study?
Does type 1 diabetes impair endothelial function as measured by reactive hyperemia index in young adults compared to healthy controls?
Does type 1 diabetes impair endothelial function as measured by reactive hyperemia index in young adults compared to healthy controls?
Endothelial function, as measured by reactive hyperemia index, appears preserved in young adults with type 1 diabetes despite suboptimal long-term glycemic control.
Endothelial function appears preserved by PAT in young T1D adults; leaves open when and how dysfunction emerges longitudinally.
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Endothelial dysfunction is involved in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis and is typically present in older adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). In young adults, we aimed to assess the impact of T1D on endothelial function as detected by digital peripheral arterial tonometry (PAT) and its relationship with cardiovascular risk factors and long term glycemic control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Reactive hyperemia index (RHI) as a measure of endothelial function was assessed by PAT in 46 T1D patients and 32 healthy controls. All were participants in the "Atherosclerosis and Childhood Diabetes" study, with baseline values registered five years previously. Annual measurements of HbA1c for assessment of glycemic burden were provided by the Norwegian Childhood Diabetes Registry. RESULTS: The diabetes patients had a mean age of 20.8 years, a median duration of diabetes of 10.0 years and a mean HbA1c of 8.7%. RHI was not significantly decreased in the diabetes group, mean 2.00 (SD = 0.59) vs. 2.21 (SD = 0.56), p = .116. There was no gender difference or any associations with traditional risk factors. Furthermore, there was no significant association between RHI and either HbA1c or long term glycemic burden. CONCLUSIONS: RHI as a measure of endothelial function was preserved in young adults with T1D compared with healthy controls.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Heier et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: