ReviewEchocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.)2026
Global Longitudinal Strain in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes: Why Similar Abnormalities May Not Mean the Same Thing.
Review in Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Global longitudinal strain (GLS) is increasingly used to detect subclinical myocardial dysfunction in diabetes, but similar abnormalities may not carry the same biological meaning in type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D). In T1D, chronic hyperglycemia, oxidative stress, microvascular dysfunction, and progressive interstitial remodeling may contribute prominently to impaired myocardial deformation. In T2D, insulin resistance, adiposity, lipotoxicity, mitochondrial dysfunction, and altered myocardial energetics may have greater influence, although substantial mechanistic overlap exists. This review examines how these differing pathophysiological contexts influence the interpretation of GLS, the evolution of myocardial dysfunction, and reported responses to contemporary cardiometabolic therapies. Complementary deformation parameters are also considered where they provide additional insight into ventricular mechanics. Importantly, GLS is a sensitive marker of myocardial dysfunction but is not mechanism-specific and may be influenced by metabolic, hemodynamic, and loading conditions. Interpretation should therefore incorporate diabetes subtype, disease duration, glycemic burden, comorbidity, and complementary imaging findings. A mechanistically informed approach may improve the clinical and research interpretation of myocardial deformation in diabetes.
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.