ArticleBMC cardiovascular disorders2022
Peripheral arterial disease progression and ankle brachial index: a cohort study with newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes.
Article in BMC cardiovascular disorders, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of Nrf2 Single Nucleotide Polymorphism rs35652124 and FABP4 Levels with Peripheral Artery Disease Among Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Pakistani Population.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Article
- Assessing the Impact of Neuromuscular Taping on Thrombocyte Indices in Diabetic Neuropathy Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease: A Cross-Sectional Study.Health science reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLittle is known about the evolution of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) since diagnosis and its association with glycemic and lipid control in patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM).
objectiveEvaluate the actual criteria to start screening PAD with ankle-brachial index (ABI) in T2DM patients and assess its progression and relationship with glycemic and lipid control since diagnosis.
methodsWe performed a 3-year prospective cohort study with two groups: group 1 (978 individuals with T2DM undergoing drug treatment) and group 2 [221 newly diagnosed drug-naive (< 3 months) patients with T2DM]. PAD diagnosis was by ABI ≤ 0.90, regardless any symptoms.
resultsAs expected, abnormal ABI prevalence was higher in group 1 vs. Group 2 (87% vs. 60%, p < 0.001). However, abnormal ABI prevalence did not differ between patients over and under 50 years in both groups. Our drug-naive group stabilizes ABI (0.9 ± 0.1 vs 0.9 ± 0.1, p = NS) and improved glycemic and lipid control during follow-up [glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) = 8.9 ± 2.1 vs 8.4 ± 2.3%, p < 0.05; LDL = 132 ± 45 vs 113 ± 38 mg/dL, p < 0.01, respectively]. When compared, patients who evolved with normalization or maintained normal ABI levels at the end [Group A, N = 60 (42%)] with those who decreased ABI to abnormal levels (ABI basal 1.0 ± 0.1 vs final 0.85 ± 0.1, p < 0.001) [Group B, N = 26 (18%)], an improvement in HbA1c (9 ± 2 vs 8 ± 2%, p < 0.05) and a correlation between the final HbA1c with ABI (r = - 0.3, p = 0.01) was found only in the first. In addition, a correlation was found between albuminuria variation and ABI solely in group A (r = - 0.3; p < 0.05).
conclusionOur study suggests that ABI should be measured at diagnosis in T2DM patients, indicating that current criteria to select patients to screen PAD with ABI must be simplified. An improvement in albuminuria and glycemic and lipid control could be related with ABI normalization in newly diagnosed T2DM drug-naive patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.