Key result
The warm-up effect was preserved with diet, partially preserved with gliclazide (exercise duration 486 vs 537 s, P<0.001), and abolished with glibenclamide (431 vs 451 s, P<0.05).
Why the study?
Does the type of sulfonylurea or diet therapy affect ischaemic preconditioning (the warm-up effect) in type 2 diabetic patients with stable angina?
Observational (n=64)
Does the type of sulfonylurea or diet therapy affect ischaemic preconditioning (the warm-up effect) in type 2 diabetic patients with stable angina?
In diabetic patients with stable angina, glibenclamide abolishes ischaemic preconditioning (the warm-up effect), whereas gliclazide partially preserves it and diet therapy fully preserves it.
Glibenclamide may blunt exercise tolerance in CAD; leaves open differential sulfonylurea effects on warm-up angina.
BACKGROUND: Classic sulfonyloureas (SUs) are known to attenuate ischaemic preconditioning. Gliclazide is an SU agent believed to be more protective. We assessed the effects of diet, glibenclamide, or gliclazide on the warm-up effect in type 2 diabetic patients with stable angina. METHODS: The study group consisted of 64 men, aged 54+/-5 years: 17 patients without diabetes (G I) and 47 diabetic patients: 16 patients treated with glibenclamide (G II), 16 with gliclazide (G III) and 15 patients treated with diet (G IV). After the baseline positive exercise test (ET1), all patients reexercised after 30-min rest (ET2). We analysed exercise duration (ED, s), time to 1 mm ST depression (T-STD, s), max STD (mm), heart rate-systolic blood pressure product at 1 mm STD, or ischaemic threshold (mmHg/min x 100) and the total ischaemic time (s). RESULTS: In G I, all analysed variables improved significantly during ET2 relative to ET1. Glibenclamide (G II) completely abolished the protective effect of exercise-induced ischaemia because only ED increased during ET2 (431 vs. 451, P<0.05). In G III, however, ED (486 vs. 537, P<0.001), T-STD (364 vs. 388, P<0.05) and max STD (2.5 vs. 2.0, P<0.05) improved significantly during ET2, whereas ischaemic threshold and total ischaemic time did not (PNS). In G IV, similar to G I, all variables improved significantly during ET2 relative to ET1. CONCLUSION: Warm-up effect is preserved in diabetic patients with stable angina treated with diet, partially preserved in gliclazide-treated and abolished in glibenclamide-treated patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bilińska et al. (2007) conducted an observational in Type 2 diabetes with stable angina (n=64). Glibenclamide or gliclazide vs. Diet or no diabetes was evaluated on Warm-up effect (improvement in exercise variables during second exercise test). The warm-up effect was preserved with diet, partially preserved with gliclazide (exercise duration 486 vs 537 s, P<0.001), and abolished with glibenclamide (431 vs 451 s, P<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: