CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 460Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementDiabetes Management and ResearchSkin Diseases and Diabetes

11. Microvascular Complications and Foot Care: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes−2020

Open access
American Diabetes Association·2020·Diabetes Care
DOI 10.2337/dc20-s011
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) “Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes” includes the ADA’s current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA’s clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc20-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

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 · 10.2337/dc20-s011

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Autonomous AI allows real-time, point-of-care diagnosis, whether in the primary care, endocrine, or other outpatient setting, can be integrated into the diabetes care workflow, and was included in the ADA standards of care for DED screening in adults as of 2020.

    “Autonomous AI allows real-time, point-of-care diagnosis, whether in the primary care, endocrine, or other outpatient setting, can be integrated into the diabetes care workflow, and was included in the ADA standards of care for DED screening in adults as of 202036.”

    From Autonomous artificial intelligence increases screening and follow-up for diabetic retinopathy in youth: the ACCESS randomized control trial (2024) · cites this paper as [36]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 117

  1. National Kidney Foundation. KDIGO 2012 clin- ical practice guideline for the evaluation and management of chronic kidney disease. Kidney Int Suppl 2013;3:1-150
  2. Afkarian M, Zelnick LR, Hall YN, et al. Clinical manifestations of kidney disease among US Adults with diabetes, 1988-2014. JAMA 2016; 316:602-610
  3. de Boer IH, Rue TC, Hall YN, Heagerty PJ, Weiss NS, Himmelfarb J. Temporal trends in the prev- alence of diabetic kidney disease in the United States. JAMA 2011;305:2532-2539
  4. Afkarian M, Sachs MC, Kestenbaum B, et al. Kidney disease and increased mortality risk in type 2 diabetes. J Am Soc Nephrol 2013;24:302- 308
  5. Groop P-H, Thomas MC, Moran JL, et al.; FinnDiane Study Group. The presence and se- verity of chronic kidney disease predicts all-cause mortality in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes 2009;58: 1651-1658
  6. Gomes MB, Gonçalves MF. Is there a phys- iological variability for albumin excretion rate? Study in patients with diabetes type 1 and non- diabetic individuals. Clin Chim Acta 2001;304: 117-123
  7. Naresh CN, Hayen A, Weening A, Craig JC, Chadban SJ. Day-to-day variability in spot urine albumin-creatinine ratio. Am J Kidney Dis 2013; 62:1095-1101
  8. Delanaye P, Glassock RJ, Pottel H, Rule AD. An age-calibrated definition of chronic kidney disease: rationale and benefits. Clin Biochem Rev 2016;37:17-26
  9. Molitch ME, Steffes M, Sun W, et al.; Epide- miology of Diabetes Interventions and Com- plications Study Group. Development and progression of renal insufficiency with and without albu- minuria in adults with type 1 diabetes in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial and the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications study. Diabetes Care 2010;33: 1536-1543
  10. Levey AS, Coresh J, Balk E, et al.; National Kidney Foundation. National Kidney Foundation practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Ann Intern Med 2003;139:137-147
  11. Flynn C, Bakris GL. Noninsulin glucose- lowering agents for the treatment of patients on dialysis. Nat Rev Nephrol 2013;9:147-153
  12. Matzke GR, Aronoff GR, Atkinson AJ Jr, et al. Drug dosing consideration in patients with acute and chronic kidney disease-a clinical update from Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO). Kidney Int 2011;80:1122-1137
  13. Coresh J, Turin TC, Matsushita K, et al. De- cline in estimated glomerular filtration rate and subsequent risk of end-stage renal disease and mortality. JAMA 2014;311:2518-2531
  14. Zhou J, Liu Y, Tang Y, et al. A comparison of RIFLE, AKIN, KDIGO, and Cys-C criteria for the definition of acute kidney injury in critically ill patients. Int Urol Nephrol 2016;48:125-132
  15. Hoste EAJ, Kellum JA, Selby NM, et al. Global epidemiology and outcomes of acute kidney injury. Nat Rev Nephrol 2018;14:607-625
  16. Wanner C, Inzucchi SE, Lachin JM, et al.; EMPA-REG OUTCOME Investigators. Empagli- flozin and progression of kidney disease in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2016;375:323- 334
  17. Neuen BL, Ohkuma T, Neal B, et al. Cardio- vascular and renal outcomes with canagliflozin according to baseline kidney function: data from the CANVAS Program. Circulation 2018;138: 1537-1550
  18. Thakar CV, Christianson A, Himmelfarb J, Leonard AC. Acute kidney injury episodes and chronic kidney disease risk in diabetes mellitus. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2011;6:2567-2572
  19. Bakris GL, Weir MR. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor-associated elevations in serum creatinine: is this a cause for concern? Arch Intern Med 2000;160:685-693
  20. Collard D, Brouwer TF, Peters RJG, Vogt L, van den Born BH. Creatinine rise during blood pressure therapy and the risk of adverse clinical outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mel- litus. Hypertension 2018;72:1337-1344
  21. de Boer IH, Gao X, Cleary PA, et al.; Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) Research Group. Albuminuria changes and cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 1 diabetes: the DCCT/EDIC study. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2016;11:1969-1977
  22. Sumida K, Molnar MZ, Potukuchi PK, et al. Changes in albuminuria and subsequent risk of incident kidney disease. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2017;12:1941-1949
  23. Inker LA, Grams ME, Levey AS, et al.; CKD Prognosis Consortium. Relationship of estimated GFR and albuminuria to concurrent laboratory abnormalities: an individual participant data meta-analysis in a global consortium. Am J Kidney Dis 2019;73:206-217
  24. Whelton PK, Carey RM, Aronow WS, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/AGS/APhA/ ASH/ASPC/NMA/PCNA guideline for the preven- tion, detection, evaluation, and management of high blood pressure in adults: executive sum- mary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Hyperten- sion 2018;71:1269-1324
  25. Murray DP, Young L, Waller J, et al. Is dietary protein intake predictive of 1-year mortality in dialysis patients? Am J Med Sci 2018;356:234- 243
  26. DCCT/EDIC research group. Effect of inten- sive diabetes treatment on albuminuria in type 1 diabetes: long-term follow-up of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial and Epidemiol- ogy of Diabetes Interventions and Complications study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2014;2:793- 800
  27. UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Effect of intensive blood-glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34). Lancet 1998;352:854-865
  28. Ismail-Beigi F, Craven T, Banerji MA, et al.; ACCORD trial group. Effect of intensive treat- ment of hyperglycaemia on microvascular out- comes in type 2 diabetes: an analysis of the ACCORD randomised trial. Lancet 2010;376:419- 430
  29. Zoungas S, Chalmers J, Neal B, et al.; ADVANCE-ON Collaborative Group. Follow-up of blood-pressure lowering and glucose control in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2014;371:1392- 1406
  30. Agrawal L, Azad N, Bahn GD, et al.; VADT Study Group. Long-term follow-up of intensive glycaemic control on renal outcomes in the Veterans Affairs Diabetes Trial (VADT). Diabeto- logia 2018;61:295-299
  31. Miller ME, Bonds DE, Gerstein HC, et al.; ACCORD Investigators. The effects of baseline characteristics, glycaemia treatment approach, and glycated haemoglobin concentration on the risk of severe hypoglycaemia: post hoc epide- miological analysis of the ACCORD study. BMJ 2010;340:b5444
  32. National Kidney Foundation. KDOQI clinical practice guideline for diabetes and CKD: 2012 Up- date. Am J Kidney Dis 2012;60:850-886
  33. Cherney DZI, Perkins BA, Soleymanlou N, et al. Renal hemodynamic effect of sodium- glucose cotransporter 2 inhibition in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Circulation 2014; 129:587-597
  34. Neal B, Perkovic V, Mahaffey KW, et al.; CANVAS Program Collaborative Group. Canagliflozin and cardiovascular and renal events in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2017;377:644-657
  35. Woods TC, Satou R, Miyata K, et al. Canagli- flozin prevents intrarenal angiotensinogen aug- mentation and mitigates kidney injury and hypertension in mouse model of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Am J Nephrol 2019;49:331-342
  36. Yaribeygi H, Butler AE, Atkin SL, Katsiki N, Sahebkar A. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 in- hibitors and inflammation in chronic kidney disease: possible molecular pathways. J Cell Physiol 2018;234:223-230
  37. Cooper ME, Perkovic V, McGill JB, et al. Kidney disease end points in a pooled analysis of individual patient-level data from a large clinical trials program of the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor linagliptin in type 2 diabetes. Am J Kidney Dis 2015;66:441-449
  38. Mann JFE, Ørsted DD, Brown-Frandsen K, et al.; LEADER Steering Committee and Inves- tigators.. Liraglutide and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2017;377:839- 848
  39. Moen MF, Zhan M, Hsu VD, et al. Frequency of hypoglycemia and its significance in chronic kidney disease. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2009;4: 1121-1127
  40. Mahaffey KW, Neal B, Perkovic V, et al.; CANVAS Program Collaborative Group. Canagli- flozin for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular events: results from the CANVAS program (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assess- ment Study). Circulation 2018;137:323-334
  41. Jardine MJ, Mahaffey KW, Neal B, et al.; CREDENCE study investigators. The Canagliflozin and Renal Endpoints in Diabetes with Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation (CREDENCE) study rationale, design, and baseline character- istics. Am J Nephrol 2017;46:462-472
  42. Mahaffey KW, Jardine MJ, Bompoint S, et al. Canagliflozin and cardiovascular and renal out- comes in type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease in primary and secondary cardio- vascular prevention groups. Circulation 2019; 140:739-750
  43. Bakris GL. Major advancements in slowing diabetic kidney disease progression: focus on SGLT2 inhibitors. Am J Kidney Dis. 28 June 2019 [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1053/ j.ajkd.2019.05.009 · DOI · Paper page
  44. Cushman WC, Evans GW, Byington RP, et al.; ACCORD Study Group. Effects of intensive blood- pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 2010;362:1575-1585
  45. UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group. Tight blood pressure control and risk of macro- vascular and microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 38. BMJ 1998;317:703- 713
  46. Lewis EJ, Hunsicker LG, Clarke WR, et al.; Collaborative Study Group. Renoprotective ef- fect of the angiotensin-receptor antagonist irbesartan in patients with nephropathy due to type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2001;345:851- 860
  47. Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators. Effects of ramipril on car- diovascular and microvascular outcomes in peo- ple with diabetes mellitus: results of the HOPE study and MICRO-HOPE substudy. Lancet 2000; 355:253-259
  48. Barnett AH, Bain SC, Bouter P, et al.; Dia- betics Exposed to Telmisartan and Enalapril Study Group. Angiotensin-receptor blockade versus converting-enzyme inhibition in type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2004; 351:1952-1961
  49. Mauer M, Zinman B, Gardiner R, et al. Renal and retinal effects of enalapril and losartan in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2009;361:40-51
  50. Weil EJ, Fufaa G, Jones LI, et al. Effect of losartan on prevention and progression of early diabetic nephropathy in American Indians with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes 2013;62:3224-3231
  51. Bangalore S, Fakheri R, Toklu B, Messerli FH. Diabetes mellitus as a compelling indication for use of renin angiotensin system blockers: sys- tematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. BMJ 2016;352:i438
  52. Yusuf S, Teo KK, Pogue J, et al.; ONTARGET Investigators. Telmisartan, ramipril, or both in patients at high risk for vascular events. N Engl J Med 2008;358:1547-1559
  53. Fried LF, Emanuele N, Zhang JH, et al.; VA NEPHRON-D Investigators. Combined angioten- sin inhibition for the treatment of diabetic nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2013;369:1892-1903
  54. Bakris GL, Agarwal R, Chan JC, et al.; Min- eralocorticoid Receptor Antagonist Tolerability Study-Diabetic Nephropathy (ARTS-DN) Study Group. Effect of finerenone on albuminuria in patients with diabetic nephropathy: a random- ized clinical trial. JAMA 2015;314:884-894
  55. Williams B, MacDonald TM, Morant S, et al.; British Hypertension Society's PATHWAY Studies Group. Spironolactone versus placebo, bisoprolol, and doxazosin to determine the optimal treatment for drug-resistant hyperten- sion (PATHWAY-2): a randomised, double-blind, crossover trial. Lancet 2015;386:2059-2068
  56. Filippatos G, Anker SD, Böhm M, et al. A randomized controlled study of finerenone vs. eplerenone in patients with worsening chronic heart failure and diabetes mellitus and/or chronic kidney disease. Eur Heart J 2016;37:2105-2114
  57. Solomon SD, Chew E, Duh EJ, et al. Diabetic retinopathy: a position statement by the Amer- ican Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care 2017; 40:412-418 101.
  58. Klein R. Hyperglycemia and microvascular and macrovascular disease in diabetes. Diabetes Care 1995;18:258-268 102.
  59. Estacio RO, McFarling E, Biggerstaff S, Jeffers BW, Johnson D, Schrier RW. Overt albu- minuria predicts diabetic retinopathy in His- panics with NIDDM. Am J Kidney Dis 1998;31: 947-953 103.
  60. Leske MC, Wu S-Y, Hennis A, et al.; Barba- dos Eye Study Group. Hyperglycemia, blood pressure, and the 9-year incidence of diabetic retinopathy: the Barbados Eye Studies. Ophthal- mology 2005;112:799-805 104.
  61. Chew EY, Davis MD, Danis RP, et al.; Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Eye Study Research Group. The effects of medical management on the progression of diabetic retinopathy in persons with type 2 diabetes: the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) Eye Study. Ophthalmology 2014;121:2443-2451 105.
  62. Nathan DM, Genuth S, Lachin J, et al.; Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Re- search Group. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 1993;329:977- 986 106.
  63. Gubitosi-Klug RA, Sun W, Cleary PA, et al.; Writing Team for the DCCT/EDIC Research Group. Effects of prior intensive insulin therapy and risk factors on patient-reported visual function outcomes in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabe- tes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/ EDIC) cohort. JAMA Ophthalmol 2016;134: 137-145 108.
  64. Fong DS, Aiello LP, Ferris FL 3rd, Klein R. Diabetic retinopathy. Diabetes Care 2004;27: 2540-2553 109. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. Effect of pregnancy on micro- vascular complications in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Diabetes Care 2000;23: 1084-1091 110.
  65. Dabelea D, Stafford JM, Mayer-Davis EJ, et al.; SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Research Group. Association of type 1 diabetes vs type 2 diabetes diagnosed during childhood and ado- lescence with complications during teenage years and young adulthood. JAMA 2017;317: 825-835 111.
  66. Agardh E, Tababat-Khani P. Adopting 3-year screening intervals for sight-threatening retinal vascular lesions in type 2 diabetic subjects with- out retinopathy. Diabetes Care 2011;34:1318- 1319 112.
  67. Daskivich LP, Vasquez C, Martinez C Jr, Tseng C-H, Mangione CM. Implementation and evaluation of a large-scale teleretinal di- abetic retinopathy screening program in the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services. JAMA Intern Med 2017;177:642-649 114.
  68. Sim DA, Mitry D, Alexander P, et al. The evolution of teleophthalmology programs in the United Kingdom: beyond diabetic retinopathy screening. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2016;10: 308-317 115.
  69. Abràmoff MD, Lavin PT, Birch M, Shah N, Folk JC. Pivotal trial of an autonomous AI-based diagnostic system for detection of diabetic ret- inopathy in primary care offices. NPJ Digit Med 2018;1:39 116.
  70. Axer-Siegel R, Hod M, Fink-Cohen S, et al. Diabetic retinopathy during pregnancy. Ophthal- mology 1996;103:1815-1819 118.
  71. Best RM, Chakravarthy U. Diabetic retinop- athy in pregnancy. Br J Ophthalmol 1997;81:249- 251 119.
  72. Gunderson EP, Lewis CE, Tsai A-L, et al. A 20-year prospective study of childbearing and incidence of diabetes in young women, con- trolling for glycemia before conception: the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) Study. Diabetes 2007;56: 2990-2996 120. The Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group. Preliminary report on effects of photo- coagulation therapy. Am J Ophthalmol 1976;81: 383-396 121.
  73. Gross JG, Glassman AR, Jampol LM, et al.; Writing Committee for the Diabetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network. Panretinal photo- coagulation vs intravitreous ranibizumab for proliferative diabetic retinopathy: a random- ized clinical trial. JAMA 2015;314:2137-2146 122. Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study research group. Photocoagulation for diabetic macular edema. Early Treatment Diabetic Reti- nopathy Study report number 1. Arch Ophthalmol 1985;103:1796-1806 123.
  74. Elman MJ, Bressler NM, Qin H, et al.; Di- abetic Retinopathy Clinical Research Network. Expanded 2-year follow-up of ranibizumab plus prompt or deferred laser or triamcinolone plus prompt laser for diabetic macular edema. Oph- thalmology 2011;118:609-614 124.
  75. Mitchell P, Bandello F, Schmidt-Erfurth U, et al.; RESTORE study group. The RESTORE study: ranibizumab monotherapy or combined with laser versus laser monotherapy for diabetic macular edema. Ophthalmology 2011;118: 615-625 125.
  76. Nguyen QD, Brown DM, Marcus DM, et al.; RISE and RIDE Research Group. Ranibizumab for diabetic macular edema: results from 2 phase III randomized trials: RISE and RIDE. Ophthalmology 2012;119:789-801 126.
  77. Shih C-J, Chen H-T, Kuo S-C, et al. Compar- ative effectiveness of angiotensin-converting- enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor blockers in patients with type 2 diabetes and retinopathy. CMAJ 2016;188:E148-E157 127.
  78. Shi R, Zhao L, Wang F, et al. Effects of lipid- lowering agents on diabetic retinopathy: a meta- analysis and systematic review. Int J Ophthalmol 2018;11:287-295 128.
  79. Ang L, Jaiswal M, Martin C, Pop-Busui R. Glucose control and diabetic neuropathy: lessons from recent large clinical trials. Curr Diab Rep 2014;14:528 129.
  80. Martin CL, Albers JW, Pop-Busui R; DCCT/ EDIC Research Group. Neuropathy and related findings in the diabetes control and complica- tions trial/epidemiology of diabetes interven- tions and complications study. Diabetes Care 2014;37:31-38 130.
  81. Pop-Busui R, Boulton AJM, Feldman EL, et al. Diabetic neuropathy: a position statement by the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Care 2017;40:136-154 131.
  82. Freeman R. Not all neuropathy in diabetes is of diabetic etiology: differential diagnosis of diabetic neuropathy. Curr Diab Rep 2009;9:423- 431 132.
  83. Pop-Busui R, Evans GW, Gerstein HC, et al.; Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Study Group. Effects of cardiac autonomic dys- function on mortality risk in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial. Diabetes Care 2010;33:1578-1584 133.
  84. Smith AG, Lessard M, Reyna S, Doudova M, Singleton JR. The diagnostic utility of Sudoscan for distal symmetric peripheral neuropathy. J Diabetes Complications 2014;28:511-516 135. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) Research Group. Effect of intensive di- abetes treatment on nerve conduction in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Ann Neurol 1995;38:869-880 136. CDC Study Group. The effect of intensive diabetes therapy on measures of autonomic nervous system function in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT). Diabetologia 1998;41:416-423 137.
  85. Albers JW, Herman WH, Pop-Busui R, et al.; Diabetes Control and Complications Trial /Epi- demiology of Diabetes Interventions and Com- plications Research Group. Effect of prior intensive insulin treatment during the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) on pe- ripheral neuropathy in type 1 diabetes during the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study. Diabetes Care 2010; 33:1090-1096 138.
  86. Sadosky A, Schaefer C, Mann R, et al. Burden of illness associated with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy among adults seeking treatment in the US: results from a retrospective chart review and cross-sectional survey. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes 2013;6:79-92 142.
  87. Waldfogel JM, Nesbit SA, Dy SM, et al. Pharmacotherapy for diabetic peripheral neu- ropathy pain and quality of life: a systematic review. Neurology 2017;88:1958-1967 143.
  88. Bril V, England J, Franklin GM, et al.; Amer- ican Academy of Neurology; American Associa- tion of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine; American Academy of Physical Med- icine and Rehabilitation. Evidence-based guide- line: treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy: report of the American Academy of Neurology, the American Association of Neuromuscular and Electrodiagnostic Medicine, and the Amer- ican Academy of Physical Medicine and Re- habilitation [published correction appears in Neurology 2011;77:603]. Neurology 2011;76: 1758-1765 145.
  89. Griebeler ML, Morey-Vargas OL, Brito JP, et al. Pharmacologic interventions for painful diabetic neuropathy: an umbrella systematic re- view and comparative effectiveness network meta-analysis. Ann Intern Med 2014;161:639-649 146.
  90. Ziegler D, Fonseca V. From guideline to patient: a review of recent recommendations for pharmacotherapy of painful diabetic neu- ropathy. J Diabetes Complications 2015;29: 146-156 147.
  91. Freeman R, Durso-Decruz E, Emir B. Effi- cacy, safety, and tolerability of pregabalin treat- ment for painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: findings from seven randomized, controlled trials across a range of doses. Diabetes Care 2008;31: 1448-1454 148.
  92. Raskin P, Huffman C, Toth C, et al. Pregabalin in patients with inadequately treated painful di- abetic peripheral neuropathy: a randomized with- drawal trial. Clin J Pain 2014;30:379-390 150.
  93. Ziegler D, Duan WR, An G, Thomas JW, Nothaft W. A randomized double-blind, placebo-, and active-controlled study of T-type calcium channel blocker ABT-639 in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. Pain 2015;156:2013- 2020 152.
  94. Quilici S, Chancellor J, Löthgren M, et al. Meta-analysis of duloxetine vs. pregabalin and gabapentin in the treatment of diabetic periph- eral neuropathic pain. BMC Neurol 2009;9:6 153.
  95. Dworkin RH, Jensen MP, Gammaitoni AR, Olaleye DO, Galer BS. Symptom profiles differ in patients with neuropathic versus non- neuropathic pain. J Pain 2007;8:118-126 154.
  96. Wernicke JF, Pritchett YL, D'Souza DN, et al. A randomized controlled trial of duloxetine in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. Neurology 2006;67:1411-1420 156.
  97. Schwartz S, Etropolski M, Shapiro DY, et al. Safety and efficacy of tapentadol ER in patients with painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: re- sults of a randomized-withdrawal, placebo-con- trolled trial. Curr Med Res Opin 2011;27:151-162 158.
  98. Vinik AI, Shapiro DY, Rauschkolb C, et al. A randomized withdrawal, placebo-controlled study evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol extended release in patients with chronic painful diabetic peripheral neurop- athy. Diabetes Care 2014;37:2302-2309 159.
  99. Briasoulis A, Silver A, Yano Y, Bakris GL. Orthostatic hypotension associated with baro- receptor dysfunction: treatment approaches. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich) 2014;16:141-148 160.
  100. Figueroa JJ, Basford JR, Low PA. Preventing and treating orthostatic hypotension: As easy as A, B, C. Cleve Clin J Med 2010;77:298-306 161.
  101. Jordan J, Fanciulli A, Tank J, et al. Manage- ment of supine hypertension in patients with neurogenic orthostatic hypotension: scientific statement of the American Autonomic Society, European Federation of Autonomic Societies, and the European Society of Hypertension. J Hypertens 2019;37:1541-1546 162.
  102. Camilleri M, Parkman HP, Shafi MA, Abell TL, Gerson L; American College of Gastroenterology. Clinical guideline: management of gastroparesis. Am J Gastroenterol 2013;108:18-37 163.
  103. Maganti K, Onyemere K, Jones MP. Oral erythromycin and symptomatic relief of gastro- paresis: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol 2003;98:259-263 169.
  104. McCallum RW, Snape W, Brody F, Wo J, Parkman HP, Nowak T. Gastric electrical stimula- tion with Enterra therapy improves symptoms from diabetic gastroparesis in a prospective study. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2010;8:947-954 170.
  105. Bus SA, van Deursen RW, Armstrong DG, Lewis JE, Caravaggi CF, Cavanagh PR; Interna- tional Working Group on the Diabetic Foot. Footwear and offloading interventions to pre- vent and heal foot ulcers and reduce plantar pressure in patients with diabetes: a systematic review. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2016;32(Suppl. 1):99-118 171.
  106. Ulbrecht JS, Hurley T, Mauger DT, Cavanaugh PR. Prevention of recurrent foot ulcers with plantar pressure-based in-shoe orthoses: the CareFUL Prevention multicenter randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care 2014;37:1982- 1989 172.
  107. Boulton AJM, Armstrong DG, Albert SF, et al.; American Diabetes Association; American Associ- ation of Clinical Endocrinologists. Comprehensive foot examination and risk assessment: a report of the task force of the foot care interest group of the American Diabetes Association, with endorsement by the American Association of Clinical Endocri- nologists. Diabetes Care 2008;31:1679-1685 173.
  108. Litzelman DK, Slemenda CW, Langefeld CD, et al. Reduction of lower extremity clinical abnormalities in patients with non-insulin- dependent diabetes mellitus. A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 1993;119:36-41 175. IWGDF. IWGDF Guidelines on the pre- vention and management of diabetic foot disease. Accessed 12 September 2019. Available from https://iwgdfguidelines.org/wp-content/ uploads/2019/05/IWGDF-Guidelines-2019.pdf 176.
  109. Bonner T, Foster M, Spears-Lanoix E. Type 2 diabetes-related foot care knowledge and foot self-care practice interventions in the United States: a systematic review of the literature. Diabet Foot Ankle 2016;7:29758 177.
  110. Lipsky BA, Berendt AR, Cornia PB, et al.; Infectious Diseases Society of America. 2012 Infectious Diseases Society of America clinical practice guideline for the diagnosis and treat- ment of diabetic foot infections. Clin Infect Dis 2012;54:e132-e173 178.
  111. Elraiyah T, Tsapas A, Prutsky G, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of adjunc- tive therapies in diabetic foot ulcers. J Vasc Surg 2016;63(2 Suppl.):46S-58S.e1-2 179. Game FL, Apelqvist J, Attinger C, et al.; International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot. Effectiveness of interventions to enhance healing of chronic ulcers of the foot in diabetes: a systematic review. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2016;32(Suppl. 1):154-168 180.
  112. Fedorko L, Bowen JM, Jones W, et al. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy does not reduce indications for amputation in patients with di- abetes with nonhealing ulcers of the lower limb: a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial. Diabetes Care 2016;39: 392-399 183.
  113. Li G, Hopkins RB, Levine MAH, et al. Relationship between hyperbaric oxygen ther- apy and quality of life in participants with chronic diabetic foot ulcers: data from a ran- domized controlled trial. Acta Diabetol 2017; 54:823-831 184.
  114. Boulton AJM. The Diabetic Foot, 2000. South Dartmouth, MA, MDText.com, Inc.Ac- cessed 4 November 2019. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK409609/ 185. Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy for the Treat- ment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers. A health technol- ogy assessment. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser 2017;17:1-142 186.
  115. Stoekenbroek RM, Santema TB, Koelemay MJ, et al. Is additional hyperbaric oxygen therapy cost-effective for treating ische- mic diabetic ulcers? Study protocol for the Dutch DAMOCLES multicenter randomized clini- cal trial. J Diabetes 2015;7:125-132 187.
  116. Huang ET, Mansouri J, Murad MH, et al.; UHMS CPG Oversight Committee. A clinical practice guideline for the use of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in the treatment of diabetic foot ulcers. Undersea Hyperb Med 2015;42: 205-247 188.
  117. Vassalotti JA, Centor R, Turner BJ, Greer RC, Choi M, Sequist TD; National Kidney Foun- dation Kidney Disease Outcomes Quality Ini- tiative. Practical approach to detection and management of chronic kidney disease for the primary care clinician. Am J Med 2016; 129:153-162.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
American Diabetes Association
Corresponding author
American Diabetes Association
Venue
Diabetes Care
Publisher
American Diabetes Association
Published
2019-12-16
Volume
43
Issue
Supplement_1
Pages
S135-S151
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
DOI
10.2337/dc20-s011
OpenAlex
W4256659255
Cited by
460
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 69 · 2022: 88 · 2021: 119 · 2020: 93
FWCI
61.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.diabetesjournals.org/content/license (vor, 4 d)
Locations
  • Diabetes Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Dermatology › Skin Diseases and Diabetes
Keywords
microvascular complications, diabetic foot care, diabetes mellitus, clinical guidelines, diabetic retinopathy, diabetic nephropathy, diabetic neuropathy, diabetic foot ulcer
MeSH terms
Diabetes Mellitus, Diabetic Angiopathies, Endocrinology, Humans, Reference Standards, Societies, Medical, United States, Diabetic Foot, History, 21st Century, Standard of Care

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