Glycaemic control for painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy is more than fasting plasma glucose and glycated haemoglobin
Abstract
Background The relationship between postprandial hyperglycaemia and diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN), whether painful or painless, has yet to be determined. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the relationship in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted in adults with T2D between January and October 2013. Blood samples were collected after overnight fasting every 3 months prior to enrolment. For this study, increased postprandial glycaemic exposure was defined as high glycated haemoglobin (HbA 1c) and near-normal mean fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels. Both painless and painful DPN were evaluated using two validated tools, the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument (MNSI) and Douleur Neuropathique 4 (DN4) questionnaire.Results This study included 1040 participants with mean FPG levels<140mg/dL, 535 of which were<126mg/dL. Of these patients, 200/1040 (19.2%) and 105/535 (19.6%) had DPN. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that higher HbA 1c levels (≥7%) did not increase risk of painless DPN, but did significantly increase risk of painful DPN in T2D patients with FPG<140mg/dL and<126mg/dL, with corresponding odds ratios of 2.49 and 3.77 (95% confidence intervals: 1.09-5.71 and 1.20-11.79), respectively, after adjusting for demographic factors, diabetes-related variables and comorbidities.Conclusion This study is the first to reveal that increased postprandial glycaemic exposure, as assessed by high HbA1c and near-normal FPG levels, is associated with an increased risk of painful DPN in adults with T2D.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
There is evidence to suggest that there is poorer glycaemic control in individuals with pDN.
“There is evidence to suggest that there is poorer glycaemic control in individuals with pDN [37].”
Pai et al. showed that increased postprandial glycaemic exposure, as assessed by high HbA1c and near-normal fasting plasma glucose levels, is associated with an increased risk of pDN in type 2 diabetes.
“Pai et al. [37] showed that increased postprandial glycaemic exposure, as assessed by high glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and near-normal fasting plasma glucose levels, is associated with an increased risk of pDN in type 2 diabetes.”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 29 · Cited by 20
- Authors
- Pai, Y.-W., Tang, C.-L., Lin, C.-H., Lin, S.-Y., Lee, I.-T., & Chang, M.-H.
- Affiliations
- Taichung Veterans General Hospital (TW)
- Corresponding author
- Lee, I.-T.
- Chang, M.-H.
- Venue
- Diabetes & Metabolism
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2021-02
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 101158
- ISSN
- 1262-3636 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3024627752
- Cited by
- 20
- References
- 29
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2
- FWCI
- 1.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Diabetes & Metabolism (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital (1093404C, TCVGH 1083404C)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
- Keywords
- diabetic peripheral neuropathy, diabetic neuropathic pain, postprandial hyperglycemia, HbA1c, fasting blood glucose, type 2 diabetes, glycemic control
- MeSH terms
- Glycemic Control, Adult, Blood Glucose, Cross-Sectional Studies, Diabetic Neuropathies, Fasting, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review