Search

Purpose: To investigate the result of body impedance analysis (BIA) in type 1 diabetes mellitus patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). Methods: A total of 125 T1DM patients were selected and enrolled into the DPN group (N=30) or the control group (N=95). BIA parameters and clinical characteristics were compared to find possible risk factors. After that, they were screened by binary logistic regression. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of meaningful index was portrayed, and then, the best cutoff was founded. Results: The DNP group has elder age, longer diabetes duration, higher blood urea nitrogen (BUN) concentration, and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) level. The DNP group has larger odds of other diabetic complications including diabetic peripheral vascular disease (DPVD) and diabetic nephropathy (DN). In BIA parameters, the DPN group had higher ratio of extracellular water (ECW) and total body water (TBW) than the control group (0.3969±0.0097 vs 0.3886±0.0086, p<0.001). Binary logistic regression indicated that increase of ECW/TBW (ECW/TBW≥0.395 vs ECW/TBW<0.395, OR=4.589, 95%CI 1.609~13.091, p=0.004) may be one of risk factors of DPN. In the ROC curve, area under curve (AUC) was 0.752 (95%CI 0.646~0.857) and the best cutoff of ECW/TBW to diagnose DPN was 0.3965. Conclusion: The increase of ECW/TBW may be a new risk factor of DPN and could help doctors predict the risk of DPN in T1DM patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

(1) Background: As the introduction of "positive" diagnostic criteria for metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) does not exclude alcohol consumption, some patients originally diagnosed with alcoholic fatty liver disease (AFLD) may be diagnosed with dual- etiology fatty liver disease (AFLD&MAFLD), which requires us to urgently explore the impact of the changes in this classification of AFLD on clinical manifestations. (2) Methods: Utilizing data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database 2016–2018, a total of 9269 participants with AFLD were selected. With the definition of MAFLD, these patients were further categorized into two groups: single AFLD and AFLD&MAFLD. The primary outcome was the risk of comorbidities and organ failures. The secondary outcomes were the length of stay, total charges, and in-hospital all-cause mortality. (3) Results: The patients with AFLD&MAFLD were older, were predominantly male, and had more comorbidities and organ failures compared to the patients with AFLD. These comorbidities included coronary atherosclerosis, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular disease, arrhythmia, asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and chronic kidney disease (all p values < 0.05). The patients with AFLD&MAFLD were more likely to develop acute and chronic heart and/or kidney failures than those with single AFLD (all p < 0.05). The length of stay and total charges of the patients in the AFLD&MAFLD group were greater than the single AFLD group (p = 0.029 and p < 0.001, respectively). No significant difference in all-cause mortality was observed. (4) Conclusions: The patients with AFLD&MAFLD have more comorbidities and organ failures, longer hospital stays, and higher hospitalization costs than the patients with single AFLD. Hence, patients with dual-etiology fatty liver disease deserve more attention from clinical staff during treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]