Suppr超能文献

甲苯磺丁脲增强型与胰岛素改良型最小模型方案之间的差异。

Differences between the tolbutamide-boosted and the insulin-modified minimal model protocols.

作者信息

Saad M F, Steil G M, Kades W W, Ayad M F, Elsewafy W A, Boyadjian R, Jinagouda S D, Bergman R N

机构信息

Department of Medicine, University of Southern California Medical School, Los Angeles 90033, USA.

出版信息

Diabetes. 1997 Jul;46(7):1167-71. doi: 10.2337/diab.46.7.1167.

Abstract

The insulin-modified frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGTT) with minimal model analysis (MINMOD) was compared with the tolbutamide protocol and the glucose clamp in 35 nondiabetic subjects (age 38 +/- 2 years [mean +/- SE], BMI 27.2 +/- 0.9 kg/m2). Each subject underwent two FSIGTTs, one with tolbutamide (300 mg) and the other with insulin (0.03 U/kg) and a euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp (40 mU x m(-2) x min(-1)). Insulin sensitivity was determined from each FSIGTT with MINMOD and from the clamp. Insulin sensitivity indexes (S(I)) from the two FSIGTTs were significantly correlated (r = 0.77, P < 0.001), but S(I(insulin)) was 29 +/- 4% lower than S(I(tolbutamide)). Both S(I(insulin)) and S(I(tolbutamide)) correlated significantly with S(I(clamp)) (r = 0.70 and 0.71, P < 0.001 for each). Expressed in the same units (dl/min per pU/ml), S(I(tolbutamide)) was on average 13 +/- 6% lower than S(I(clamp)) (4.51 +/- 0.40 vs. 5.36 +/- 0.36 x 10(-2), P = 0.009), whereas S(I(insulin)) was 44 +/- 4% lower. S(G(tolbutamide)) and S(G(insulin)) were not different (1.88 +/- 0.10 vs. 2.01 +/- 0.09 x 10(-2) min(-1), P = 0.167) and were significantly correlated (r = 0.50, P = 0.002). Thus, insulin sensitivity estimates from both protocols correlate significantly with each other and with the clamp. They are quantitatively discrepant, however, possibly due to differences in the route of insulin delivery, saturation of insulin action, and/or tolbutamide-induced proinsulin release. Data obtained from these two MINMOD protocols are not directly comparable, and the same protocol must be used in any single cross-sectional or longitudinal study.

摘要

将采用最小模型分析法(MINMOD)的胰岛素改良频繁采样静脉葡萄糖耐量试验(FSIGTT)与甲苯磺丁脲方案及葡萄糖钳夹技术在35名非糖尿病受试者(年龄38±2岁[均值±标准误],体重指数27.2±0.9kg/m²)中进行比较。每位受试者接受两次FSIGTT,一次使用甲苯磺丁脲(300mg),另一次使用胰岛素(0.03U/kg)以及一次正常血糖高胰岛素钳夹试验(40mU·m⁻²·min⁻¹)。通过MINMOD从每次FSIGTT以及从钳夹试验中测定胰岛素敏感性。两次FSIGTT的胰岛素敏感性指数(S(I))显著相关(r = 0.77,P < 0.001),但S(I(胰岛素))比S(I(甲苯磺丁脲))低29±4%。S(I(胰岛素))和S(I(甲苯磺丁脲))均与S(I(钳夹试验))显著相关(r分别为0.70和0.71,P均< 0.001)。以相同单位(dl/min per pU/ml)表示时,S(I(甲苯磺丁脲))平均比S(I(钳夹试验))低13±6%(4.51±0.40对5.36±0.36×10⁻²,P = 0.009),而S(I(胰岛素))低44±4%。S(G(甲苯磺丁脲))和S(G(胰岛素))无差异(1.88±0.10对2.01±0.09×10⁻²min⁻¹,P = 0.167)且显著相关(r = 0.50,P = 0.002)。因此,两种方案的胰岛素敏感性估计值彼此之间以及与钳夹试验均显著相关。然而,它们在数量上存在差异,可能是由于胰岛素给药途径、胰岛素作用的饱和度和/或甲苯磺丁脲诱导的胰岛素原释放的差异所致。从这两种MINMOD方案获得的数据不可直接比较,在任何单项横断面或纵向研究中都必须使用相同的方案。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验