Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Research Institute of Clinical Medicine of Jeonbuk National University Medical School-Biomedical Research Institute of Jeonbuk National University Hospital, Jeonju, Korea.
Diabetes Metab J. 2022 Jan;46(1):117-128. doi: 10.4093/dmj.2020.0275. Epub 2021 Sep 9.
It is unclear whether glycemic variability (GV) is a risk factor for diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN), and whether control of GV is beneficial for DPN. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of GV on peripheral nerve damage by inducing glucose fluctuation in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats.
Rats were divided into four groups: normal (normal glucose group [NOR]), diabetes without treatment (sustained severe hyperglycemia group; diabetes mellitus [DM]), diabetes+once daily insulin glargine (stable hyperglycemia group; DM+LAN), and diabetes+once daily insulin glargine with twice daily insulin glulisine (unstable glucose fluctuation group; DM+Lantus [LAN]+Apidra [API]). We measured anti-oxidant enzyme levels and behavioral responses against tactile, thermal, and pressure stimuli in the plasma of rats. We also performed a quantitative comparison of cutaneous and sciatic nerves according to glucose fluctuation.
At week 24, intraepidermal nerve fiber density was less reduced in the insulin-administered groups compared to the DM group (P<0.05); however, a significant difference was not observed between the DM+LAN and DM+LAN+API groups irrespective of glucose fluctuation (P>0.05; 16.2±1.6, 12.4±2.0, 14.3±0.9, and 13.9±0.6 for NOR, DM, DM+LAN, and DM+LAN+API, respectively). The DM group exhibited significantly decreased glutathione levels compared to the insulin-administered groups (2.64±0.10 μmol/mL, DM+LAN; 1.93±0.0 μmol/mL, DM+LAN+API vs. 1.25±0.04 μmol/mL, DM; P<0.05).
Our study suggests that glucose control itself is more important than glucose fluctuation in the prevention of peripheral nerve damage, and intra-day glucose fluctuation has a limited effect on the progression of peripheral neuropathy in rats with diabetes.
血糖波动(GV)是否是糖尿病周围神经病变(DPN)的危险因素尚不清楚,控制 GV 是否有益于 DPN 也不清楚。本研究旨在通过诱导链脲佐菌素诱导的糖尿病大鼠的葡萄糖波动来研究 GV 对周围神经损伤的影响。
将大鼠分为四组:正常(正常葡萄糖组[NOR])、未经治疗的糖尿病(持续严重高血糖组;糖尿病[DM])、糖尿病+每日一次甘精胰岛素(稳定高血糖组;DM+LAN)和糖尿病+每日一次甘精胰岛素加每日两次赖脯胰岛素(血糖波动不稳定组;DM+Lantus[LAN]+Apidra[API])。我们测量了大鼠血浆中的抗氧化酶水平和对触觉、热觉和压力刺激的行为反应。我们还根据血糖波动对皮肤和坐骨神经进行了定量比较。
在 24 周时,与 DM 组相比,胰岛素治疗组的表皮内神经纤维密度减少较少(P<0.05);然而,无论血糖波动如何,DM+LAN 组和 DM+LAN+API 组之间均未观察到显著差异(P>0.05;NOR、DM、DM+LAN 和 DM+LAN+API 组的分别为 16.2±1.6、12.4±2.0、14.3±0.9 和 13.9±0.6)。与胰岛素治疗组相比,DM 组谷胱甘肽水平显著降低(2.64±0.10 μmol/mL,DM+LAN;1.93±0.0 μmol/mL,DM+LAN+API 与 1.25±0.04 μmol/mL,DM;P<0.05)。
我们的研究表明,血糖控制本身比预防周围神经损伤中的血糖波动更为重要,日内血糖波动对糖尿病大鼠周围神经病变的进展影响有限。