scholarly journals Clinically Significant Macular Edema and Survival in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes

2008 ◽  
Vol 145 (4) ◽  
pp. 700-706 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flavio E. Hirai ◽  
Michael D. Knudtson ◽  
Barbara E.K. Klein ◽  
Ronald Klein
2013 ◽  
Vol 230 (4) ◽  
pp. 201-206 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabel Pires ◽  
Ana Rita Santos ◽  
Sandrina Nunes ◽  
Conceição Lobo ◽  
José Cunha-Vaz

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 1433 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ines P. Marques ◽  
Maria H. Madeira ◽  
Ana L. Messias ◽  
Torcato Santos ◽  
António C-V. Martinho ◽  
...  

Our group reported that three diabetic retinopathy (DR) phenotypes: A, characterized by low microaneurysm turnover (MAT < 6) and normal central retinal thickness (CRT); B, low MAT (<6) and increased CRT, and C, high MAT (≥6), present different risks for development of macular edema (DME) and proliferative retinopathy (PDR). To test these findings, 212 persons with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and mild nonproliferative retinopathy (NPDR), one eye per person, were followed for five years with annual visits. Of these, 172 completed the follow-up or developed an outcome: PDR or DME (considering both clinically significant macular edema (CSME) and center-involved macular edema (CIME)). Twenty-seven eyes (16%) developed either CSME (14), CIME (10), or PDR (4), with one eye developing both CSME and PDR. Phenotype A showed no association with development of vision-threatening complications. Seven eyes with phenotype B and three with phenotype C developed CIME. Phenotype C showed higher risk for CSME development, with 17.41 odds ratio (p = 0.010), compared with phenotypes A + B. All eyes that developed PDR were classified as phenotype C. Levels of HbA1c and triglycerides were increased in phenotype C (p < 0.001 and p = 0.018, respectively). In conclusion, phenotype C identifies eyes at higher risk for development of CSME and PDR, whereas phenotype A identifies eyes at very low risk for vision-threatening complications.


Author(s):  
Michael Permezel ◽  
Alexis Shub

The importance of diabetes in pregnancy arises through two unrelated phenomena: an increased predisposition to impaired glucose tolerance in late pregnancy and an adverse impact of the increased glucose on important obstetric outcomes. There are marked differences in clinical outcomes and management between pregnancies in which a clinically significant impairment of glucose tolerance was first noticed during pregnancy (‘gestational diabetes mellitus’) and those where type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus had been known prior to pregnancy (‘prepregnancy diabetes’). Historically, GDM has been defined as the diagnosis of clinically significant impaired glucose tolerance in pregnancy in a woman not previously known to be diabetic. This has recently been complicated by recognizing that some diabetes mellitus will present for the first time in pregnancy and lack of clarity as to where the lower threshold for diagnosis should best be placed. Type 1 diabetes is present in approximately 0.2% of pregnant women, and the numbers are largely stable. In contrast, type 2 diabetes was once uncommon in pregnancy but is now also as high as 0.2%. This is likely to continue to increase as increased numbers of overweight and obese women enter the reproductive years. Prepregnancy diabetes provides the model of how pregnancy and maternal disease impact on each other, and how good preconception, antenatal and intrapartum care can make an enormous difference for these women and their babies.


2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. e000499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nestoras Nicolas Mathioudakis ◽  
Estelle Everett ◽  
Shuvodra Routh ◽  
Peter J Pronovost ◽  
Hsin-Chieh Yeh ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo develop and validate a multivariable prediction model for insulin-associated hypoglycemia in non-critically ill hospitalized adults.Research design and methodsWe collected pharmacologic, demographic, laboratory, and diagnostic data from 128 657 inpatient days in which at least 1 unit of subcutaneous insulin was administered in the absence of intravenous insulin, total parenteral nutrition, or insulin pump use (index days). These data were used to develop multivariable prediction models for biochemical and clinically significant hypoglycemia (blood glucose (BG) of ≤70 mg/dL and <54 mg/dL, respectively) occurring within 24 hours of the index day. Split-sample internal validation was performed, with 70% and 30% of index days used for model development and validation, respectively.ResultsUsing predictors of age, weight, admitting service, insulin doses, mean BG, nadir BG, BG coefficient of variation (CVBG), diet status, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease (CKD), liver disease, and digestive disease, our model achieved a c-statistic of 0.77 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.78), positive likelihood ratio (+LR) of 3.5 (95% CI 3.4 to 3.6) and negative likelihood ratio (−LR) of 0.32 (95% CI 0.30 to 0.35) for prediction of biochemical hypoglycemia. Using predictors of sex, weight, insulin doses, mean BG, nadir BG, CVBG, diet status, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, CKD stage, and steroid use, our model achieved a c-statistic of 0.80 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.82), +LR of 3.8 (95% CI 3.7 to 4.0) and −LR of 0.2 (95% CI 0.2 to 0.3) for prediction of clinically significant hypoglycemia.ConclusionsHospitalized patients at risk of insulin-associated hypoglycemia can be identified using validated prediction models, which may support the development of real-time preventive interventions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document