Peripheral and Autonomic Neuropathy in South Asians and White Caucasians with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Possible Explanations for Epidemiological Differences

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

12 Citations (Scopus)
139 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objectives. To compare the prevalence of diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) and that of cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) between South Asians and White Caucasians with type 2 diabetes and to explore reasons for observed differences. Methods. A cross-sectional study of casually selected South Asian and White Caucasian adults attending a hospital-based diabetes clinic in the UK. DPN and CAN were assessed using the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument (MNSI) and heart rate variability testing, respectively. Results. Patients (푛 = 266) were recruited (47.4% South Asians). DPN was more common in White Caucasians
compared to South Asians (54.3% versus 38.1%, 푝 = 0.008). Foot insensitivity as assessed by 10 g monofilament perception was more common in White Caucasians (43.9% versus 23.8%, 푝 = 0.001). After adjustment for confounders, White Caucasians remained twice as likely to have DPN as South Asians, but the impact of ethnicity became nonsignificant after adjusting for adiposity measures
or height. No difference in prevalence of standardized CAN test abnormalities was detected between ethnicities. Skin microvascular assessment demonstrated that South Asians had reduced heating flux but preserved acetylcholine response. Conclusions. South Asians with type 2 diabetes have fewer clinical signs of DPN compared to White Caucasians. Differences in adiposity (and its distribution) and height appear to explain these differences.
Original languageEnglish
Article number1273789
Number of pages10
JournalJournal of Diabetes Research
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 20 Mar 2017

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Peripheral and Autonomic Neuropathy in South Asians and White Caucasians with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Possible Explanations for Epidemiological Differences'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this