Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 283

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Treatment of diabetic polyneuropathy with the antioxidant thioctic acid (α-lipoic acid): A two year multicenter randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial (ALADIN II)

Reljanovic, M., Reichel, G., Rett, K., Lobisch, M., Schuette, K., Möller, W., Tritschler, H.-J., Mehnert, H.·1999·Free Radical Research

Abstract

Short-term trials with the antioxidant thioctic acid (TA) appear to improve neuropathic symptoms in diabetic patients, but the long-term response remains to be established. Therefore, Type 1 and Type 2 diabetic patients with symptomatic polyneuropathy were randomly assigned to three treatment regimens: (1) 2 x 600(mg of TA (TA 1200), (2) 600)mg of TA plus placebo (PLA) (TA 600) or (3) placebo and placebo (PLA). A trometamol salt solution of TA of 1200 or 600 mg or PLA was intravenously administered once daily for five consecutive days before enrolling the patients in the oral treatment phase. The study was prospective, PLA-controlled, randomized, double-blind and conducted for two years. Severity of diabetic neuropathy was assessed by the Neuropathy Disability Score (NDS) and electrophysiological attributes of the sural (sensory nerve conduction velocity (SNCV), sensory nerve action potential (SNAP)) and the tibial (motor nerve conduction velocity (MNCV), motor nerve distal latency (MNDL)) nerve. Statistical analysis was performed after independent reviewers excluded all patients with highly variable data allowing a final analysis of 65 patients (TA 1200: n = 18, TA 600: n = 27; PLA: n = 20). At baseline no significant differences were noted between the groups regarding the demographic variables and peripheral nerve function parameters for these 65 patients. Statistically significant changes after 24 months between TA and PLA were observed (mean +/- SD) for sural SNCV: +3.8 +/- 4.2 m/s in TA 1200, +3.0+/-3.0m/s in TA 600, -0.1+/-4.8m/s in PLA (p < 0.05 for TA 1200 and TA 600 vs. PLA); sural SNAP: +0.6+/-2.5 microV in TA 1200, +0.3+/-1.4 microV in TA 600, -0.7 +/- 1.5 microV in PLA (p = 0.076 for TA 1200 vs. PLA and p < 0.05 for TA 600 vs. PLA), and in tibial MNCV: +/- 1.2 +/- 3.8 m/s in TA 1200, -0.3 +/- 5.2 m/s in TA 600, 1.5 +/- 2.9 m/s in PLA (p < 0.05 for TA 1200 vs. PLA). No significant differences between the groups after 24 months were noted regarding the tibial MNDL and the NDS. We conclude that in a subgroup of patients after exclusion of patients with excessive test variability throughout the trial, TA appeared to have a beneficial effect on several attributes of nerve conduction.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10715769900300721

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 283

Metadata

Authors
Reljanovic, M., Reichel, G., Rett, K., Lobisch, M., Schuette, K., Möller, W., Tritschler, H.-J., & Mehnert, H.
Venue
Free Radical Research
Published
1999-01
Volume
31
Issue
3
Pages
171-179
ISSN
  • 1029-2470 (ISSN-L)
  • 1071-5762
OpenAlex
W2000959775
Cited by
283
References
4
FWCI
4.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.