Meijer Jan-Willem G, Bosma Eelke, Lefrandt Johan D, Links Thera P, Smit Andries J, Stewart Roy E, Van Der Hoeven Johannes H, Hoogenberg Klaas
Rehabilitation Center, Tolbrug/Jeroen Bosch Hospital, Den Bosch, the Netherlands.
Diabetes Care. 2003 Mar;26(3):697-701. doi: 10.2337/diacare.26.3.697.
To evaluate the discriminative power of the Diabetic Neuropathy Symptom (DNS) and Diabetic Neuropathy Examination (DNE) scores for diagnosing diabetic polyneuropathy (PNP), as well as their relation with cardiovascular autonomic function testing (cAFT) and electro-diagnostic studies (EDS).
Three groups (matched for age and sex) were selected: 24 diabetic patients with neuropathic foot ulcers (DU), 24 diabetic patients without clinical neuropathy or ulcers (DC), and 21 control subjects without diabetes (C). In all participants, the DNS and DNE scores were assessed and cAFT (heart rate variability [HRV], baroreflex sensitivity [BRS]), and EDS were performed (Nerve Conduction Sum [NCS] score; muscle fiber conduction velocity: fastest/slowest ratio [F/S ratio]).
Both the DNS and the DNE scores discriminated between the DU and DC groups significantly (P < 0.001). The DNE score even discriminated between DC and C (P < 0.05). Spearman's correlation coefficients between both DNS and DNE scores and cAFT (HRV -0.42 and -0.44; BRS -0.30 and -0.29, respectively) and EDS (NCS 0.51 and 0.62; F/S ratio 0.44 and 0.62, respectively) were high. Odds ratios were calculated for both DNS and DNE scores with cAFT (HRV 4.4 and 5.7; BRS 20.7 and 14.2, respectively) and EDS (NCS 5.6 and 16.8; F/S ratio 7.2 and 18.8, respectively).
The DNS and DNE scores are able to discriminate between patients with and without PNP and are strongly related to cAFT and EDS. This further confirms the strength of the DNS and DNE scores in diagnosing diabetic PNP in daily clinical practice.
评估糖尿病神经病变症状(DNS)评分和糖尿病神经病变检查(DNE)评分对诊断糖尿病多发性神经病变(PNP)的鉴别能力,以及它们与心血管自主神经功能测试(cAFT)和电诊断研究(EDS)的关系。
选取三组(年龄和性别匹配):24例患有神经性足部溃疡的糖尿病患者(DU)、24例无临床神经病变或溃疡的糖尿病患者(DC)和21例无糖尿病的对照者(C)。对所有参与者评估DNS和DNE评分,并进行cAFT(心率变异性[HRV]、压力反射敏感性[BRS])和EDS(神经传导总和[NCS]评分;肌纤维传导速度:最快/最慢比值[F/S比值])。
DNS和DNE评分在DU组和DC组之间均有显著差异(P<0.001)。DNE评分在DC组和C组之间也有差异(P<0.05)。DNS和DNE评分与cAFT(HRV分别为-0.42和-0.44;BRS分别为-0.30和-0.29)以及EDS(NCS分别为-0.51和-0.62;F/S比值分别为-0.44和-0.62)之间的Spearman相关系数均较高。计算了DNS和DNE评分与cAFT(HRV分别为4.4和5.7;BRS分别为20.7和14.2)以及EDS(NCS分别为5.6和16.8;F/S比值分别为7.2和18.8)的比值比。
DNS和DNE评分能够区分有无PNP的患者,并且与cAFT和EDS密切相关。这进一步证实了DNS和DNE评分在日常临床实践中诊断糖尿病PNP的优势。