Systematic review and meta-analysis reveals lower lung volumes in adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes, indicating subclinical pulmonary impairment linked to hyperglycemia.
Background The lung, although not traditionally been considered a target organ in diabetes, may undergo microvascular and connective tissue changes that are related to poor glycemic control. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to systematically evaluate and quantify the association between HbA1c values and pulmonary function in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. Studies were searched in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection from database inception to 25 December 2025. Eligible studies compared spirometric outcomes between adults with type 2 diabetes categorized as having good versus poor glycemic control based on HbA1c. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted using mean differences. Results Individuals with poor glycemic control had significantly lower absolute spirometric volumes. FEV1 was lower in the poor HbA1c group, with a pooled mean difference of –0.16 L (95% CI –0.25 to –0.07; p < 0.001). Similarly, FVC was reduced, with a pooled mean difference of –0.24 L (95% CI –0.35 to –0.14; p < 0.001). In contrast, the FEV1/FVC ratio was slightly higher in the poor-control group (MD = 1.61 percentage points, 95% CI 0.50 to 2.73; p = 0.005). All pooled analyses showed no evidence of statistical heterogeneity (I 2 = 0%). Conclusion Poor glycemic control in T2DM is associated with lower absolute FEV1 and FVC. The preserved or slightly higher FEV1/FVC ratio suggests reduced spirometric volumes rather than definite obstructive impairment. These findings should be interpreted as group-level associations because the analyses were based on absolute spirometric values and observational studies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Atmaja et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: