The Association of Systemic Endothelial Dysfunction With Diffuse Diabetic Macular Edema.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Angiology Pub Date : 2025-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-18 DOI:10.1177/00033197241263384
Nikolaos Gouliopoulos, Gerasimos Siasos, Evangelos Oikonomou, Spyros Sapounas, Alexandros Rouvas, Apostolos C Ziogas, Marilita M Moschos, Dimitris Tousoulis
{"title":"The Association of Systemic Endothelial Dysfunction With Diffuse Diabetic Macular Edema.","authors":"Nikolaos Gouliopoulos, Gerasimos Siasos, Evangelos Oikonomou, Spyros Sapounas, Alexandros Rouvas, Apostolos C Ziogas, Marilita M Moschos, Dimitris Tousoulis","doi":"10.1177/00033197241263384","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Our aim was to assess whether systemic endothelial dysfunction, evaluated non-invasively by flow mediated dilation (FMD), is associated with diabetic macular edema (DME) and to determine if it is further impaired in patients with diffuse-DME. Consecutive patients (<i>n</i> = 84) with type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and diabetic retinopathy were enrolled. DME was not present in 38 (non-DME) and present in 46 patients; 25 with focal and 21 with diffuse-DME. No differences were detected between DME and non-DME groups regarding the clinical and demographic characteristics, except for the age of T2DM initiation (lower in non-DME). FMD values were significantly impaired in DME compared with non-DME patients, even after adjustment for multiple covariates (3.56 ± 1.03 vs 4.57 ± 1.25%, <i>P</i> = .003). Among DME patients, no differences were found concerning the clinical and demographic data, while FMD levels were significantly lower in diffuse-DME patients, compared with the focal-DME ones, regardless of the impact several confounders (2.88 ± 0.65 vs 4.08 ± 0.95%, <i>P</i> = .002). It is noteworthy that FMD values of non-DME and focal-DME patients did not differ significantly (4.52 ± 1.24 vs 4.21 ± 1.06%, <i>P</i> = .307). Moreover, among DME patients, impaired FMD was an independent predictor of diffuse-DME (odds ratio: 0.06, 95% CI 0.01-0.47, <i>P</i> = .007).</p>","PeriodicalId":8264,"journal":{"name":"Angiology","volume":" ","pages":"991-998"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Angiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00033197241263384","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our aim was to assess whether systemic endothelial dysfunction, evaluated non-invasively by flow mediated dilation (FMD), is associated with diabetic macular edema (DME) and to determine if it is further impaired in patients with diffuse-DME. Consecutive patients (n = 84) with type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and diabetic retinopathy were enrolled. DME was not present in 38 (non-DME) and present in 46 patients; 25 with focal and 21 with diffuse-DME. No differences were detected between DME and non-DME groups regarding the clinical and demographic characteristics, except for the age of T2DM initiation (lower in non-DME). FMD values were significantly impaired in DME compared with non-DME patients, even after adjustment for multiple covariates (3.56 ± 1.03 vs 4.57 ± 1.25%, P = .003). Among DME patients, no differences were found concerning the clinical and demographic data, while FMD levels were significantly lower in diffuse-DME patients, compared with the focal-DME ones, regardless of the impact several confounders (2.88 ± 0.65 vs 4.08 ± 0.95%, P = .002). It is noteworthy that FMD values of non-DME and focal-DME patients did not differ significantly (4.52 ± 1.24 vs 4.21 ± 1.06%, P = .307). Moreover, among DME patients, impaired FMD was an independent predictor of diffuse-DME (odds ratio: 0.06, 95% CI 0.01-0.47, P = .007).

全身内皮功能障碍与弥漫性糖尿病黄斑水肿的关系
我们的目的是评估全身内皮功能障碍(通过血流介导的扩张(FMD)进行无创评估)是否与糖尿病黄斑水肿(DME)有关,并确定弥散型 DME 患者的全身内皮功能障碍是否会进一步恶化。研究人员连续招募了 84 名患有 2 型糖尿病(T2DM)和糖尿病视网膜病变的患者。其中 38 人未患有 DME(非 DME),46 人患有 DME;25 人患有局灶性 DME,21 人患有弥漫性 DME。除了开始服用 T2DM 的年龄(非 DME 患者的年龄较低)外,DME 组和非 DME 组在临床和人口统计学特征方面没有发现差异。与非 DME 患者相比,DME 患者的 FMD 值明显降低,即使在调整了多个协变量后也是如此(3.56 ± 1.03 vs 4.57 ± 1.25%,P = .003)。在 DME 患者中,临床和人口统计学数据方面没有发现差异,而弥漫型 DME 患者的 FMD 水平明显低于局灶型 DME 患者,无论几种混杂因素的影响如何(2.88 ± 0.65 vs 4.08 ± 0.95%,P = .002)。值得注意的是,非 DME 和病灶型 DME 患者的 FMD 值差异不大(4.52 ± 1.24 vs 4.21 ± 1.06%,P = .307)。此外,在 DME 患者中,FMD 受损是弥漫性-DME 的独立预测因素(几率比:0.06,95% CI 0.01-0.47,P = .007)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Angiology
Angiology 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
180
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: A presentation of original, peer-reviewed original articles, review and case reports relative to all phases of all vascular diseases, Angiology (ANG) offers more than a typical cardiology journal. With approximately 1000 pages per year covering diagnostic methods, therapeutic approaches, and clinical and laboratory research, ANG is among the most informative publications in the field of peripheral vascular and cardiovascular diseases. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Average time from submission to first decision: 13 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信