Search

In vivo corneal confocal microscopy (CCM) is a novel, rapid, and non-invasive technique that identifies early small fiber damage and can predict the progression and development of clinical neuropathy in adults with type 1 diabetes. However, its usefulness in children is not well established. This study compared corneal confocal microscopy with neuropathic symptoms, signs, and objective measures of neuropathy for the diagnosis of diabetic neuropathy in children with type 1 diabetes.A total of 83 children with type 1 diabetes and 83 healthy participants of similar age underwent assessment of neuropathy symptoms, signs, nerve conduction studies, quantitative sensory and autonomic function testing, and in vivo CCM.Only of 3/83 (4%) children with type 1 diabetes had subclinical neuropathy. However, corneal nerve fiber density (p = 0.001), branch density (p = 0.006), fiber length (p = 0.002), tibial motor nerve amplitude and conduction velocity, and sural sensory nerve amplitude and conduction velocity (all p 0.004) were lower in participants with type 1 diabetes than in the controls. Vibration, cooling, and warm perception thresholds and deep breathing heart rate variability were not found to be different (all p 0.05) between children with type 1 diabetes and healthy controls. Multivariate regression analysis identified a possible association between body mass index and decreased corneal nerves.Decreased corneal nerves and abnormal nerve conduction were found in children with type 1 diabetes. CCM may allow rapid objective detection of subclinical diabetic neuropathy in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes.

To evaluate the incremental impact of resistance training on HbA1c, fitness, body composition and cardiometabolic risk factors in aerobically-active people with type 1 diabetes.The Resistance Exercise in Already-active Diabetic Individuals (READI) trial (NCT00410436) was a four-centre randomized parallel-group trial. After a 5-week run-in period with diabetes management optimization, 131 aerobically-active individuals with type 1 diabetes were randomized to resistance exercise (n = 71, intervention - INT) or control (n = 60, CON) for 22 additional weeks. Both groups maintained their aerobic activities and were provided dietary counselling throughout. Exercise training was three times per week at community-based facilities. The primary outcome was HbA1c, and secondary outcomes included fitness (peak oxygen consumption, muscle strength), body composition (anthropometrics, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, computed tomography) and cardiometabolic risk markers (lipids, apolipoproteins). Assessors were blinded to group allocation.There were no significant differences in HbA1c change between INT and CON. Declines in HbA1c [INT: 7.75 ± 0.10% (61.2 ± 1.1 mmol/mol) to 7.55 ± 0.10% (59 ± 1.1 mmol/mol); CON: 7.70 ± 0.11% (60.7 ± 1.2 mmol/mol) to 7.57 ± 0.11% (59.6 ± 1.3 mmol/mol); intergroup difference in change -0.07 [95% CI -0.31, 0.18]. Waist circumference decreased more in INT than CON after six months (p = 0.02). Muscular strength increased more in INT than in CON (p 0.001). There were no intergroup differences in hypoglycemia or any other variables.Adding resistance training did not impact glycemia, but it increased strength and reduced waist circumference, in aerobically active individuals with type 1 diabetes.

Aims: To evaluate access to screening tools for monogenic diabetes in paediatric diabetes centres across the world and its impact on diagnosis and clinical outcomes of children and youth with genetic forms of diabetes. Methods: 79 centres from the SWEET diabetes registry including 53,207 children with diabetes participated in a survey on accessibility and use of diabetes related antibodies, c-peptide and genetic testing. Results: 73, 63 and 62 participating centres had access to c-peptide, antibody and genetic testing, respectively. Access to antibody testing was associated with higher proportion of patients with rare forms of diabetes identified with monogenic diabetes (54 % versus 17 %, p = 0.01), lower average whole clinic HbA1c (7.7[Q1,Q2: 7.3-8.0]%/61[56-64]mmol/mol versus 9.2[8.6-10.0]%/77[70-86]mmol/mol, p < 0.001) and younger age at onset (8.3 [7.3-8.8] versus 9.7 [8.6-12.7] years p < 0.001). Additional access to c-peptide or genetic testing was not related to differences in age at onset or HbA1c outcome. Conclusions: Clinical suspicion and antibody testing are related to identification of different types of diabetes. Implementing access to comprehensive antibody screening may provide important information for selecting individuals for further genetic evaluation. In addition, worse overall clinical outcomes in centers with limited diagnostic capabilities indicate they may also need support for individualized diabetes management. info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion