Here are the Phase Angle of Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis as an Indicator for Diabetic Polyneuropathy in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus journals presenting the latest research across various disciplines. From social sciences to technology, each article is expected to provide valuable insights to our readers.
Phase angle difference, phase angle of bioelectrical impedance analysis as a sentence, phase angle of bioelectrical therapy, phase angle of bioelectrical impedance analysis definition, phase angle of propellers, whole body phase angle, phase angle of bioelectrical impedance analysis chart.
Phase Angle of Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis as an Indicator for Diabetic Polyneuropathy in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus
Context: Due to the heterogenous clinical symptoms and deficits, the diagnosis of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) is still difficult in clinical routines, leading to increased morbidity and mortality. Objective: We studied the correlation of phase angle (PhA) of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) with clinical, laboratory, and physical markers of DPN to evaluate PhA as a possible diagnostic method for DPN. Materials and
methods: In this cross-sectional observational study as part of the Heidelberg Study on Diabetes and Complications, we examined 104 healthy individuals and 205 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D), among which 63 had DPN. The PhA was calculated from multifrequency BIA. Nerve conduction studies, quantitative sensory testing (QST) and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance neurography to determine fractional anisotropy (FA) reflecting peripheral nerve integrity were performed.
Results: T2D patients with DP N had lower PhA values (5.71 ± 0.10) compared to T2D patients without DPN (6.07 ± 0.08, P =. 007, + 6.1%) and healthy controls (6.18 ± 0.08, P <. 001, + 7.9%). Confounder-adjusted analyses showed correlations of the PhA with conduction velocities and amplitudes of the peroneal (β=.28; β=.31, P <. 001) and tibial nerves (β=.28; β=.32, P <. 001), Z-scores of QST (thermal detection β=.30, P <. 05) and the FA (β=.60, P <. 001). Receiver-operating characteristic analysis showed similar performance of PhA in comparison to the mentioned diagnostic methods.
Conclusion: The study shows that PhA is, in comparison to other test systems used, at least an equally good and much easier to handle investigator-independent marker for detection of DPN. © 2024 The Author(s).
Authors : Schimpfle L.; Tsilingiris D.; Mooshage C.M.; Kender Z.; Sulaj A.; Von Rauchhaupt E.; Szendroedi J.; Herzig S.; Goepfert J.; Groener J.; Nawroth P.P.; Bendszus M.; Heiland S.; Kurz F.T.; Jende J.M.E.; Kopf S.
Source : Endocrine Society
Article Information
| Year | 2024 |
| Type | Article |
| DOI | 10.1210/clinem/dgad737 |
| ISSN | 0021972X |
| Volume | 109 |
You can download the article here
If You have any problem, contact us here