Measurement of small fibre pain threshold values for the early detection of diabetic polyneuropathy.

AIM: To investigate whether Aδ and C fibre pain threshold values, measured using intra-epidermal electrical stimulation (IES), in people with and without Type 2 diabetes are useful in evaluating diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) severity. METHODS: Aδ and C fibre pain threshold values were measured in Japanese people with (n = 120) and without (n = 76) Type 2 diabetes by IES. Nerve conduction studies and other tests were performed to evaluate diabetic complications. RESULTS: Aδ and C fibre pain threshold values were high in people with diabetes compared with control subjects (Aδ fibre: 0.050 vs. 0.030 mA, P < 0.01; C fibre: 0.180 vs. 0.070 mA, P < 0.01). Participants with diabetes and neuropathy had significantly higher Aδ and C fibre pain threshold values than participants without neuropathy (Aδ fibres 0.063 vs. 0.039 mA, P < 0.01; C fibres 0.202 vs. 0.098 mA, P < 0.05). C fibre pain threshold values were significantly higher in participants with diabetes and diabetic microvascular complications than in participants without complications. Threshold values increased with complication progression. When DPN was diagnosed according to the Diabetic Neuropathy Study Group in Japan criteria, the cut-off for the C fibre pain threshold values was 0.125 mA (area under the curve 0.758, sensitivity 81.5%, specificity 61.5%). The IES test took less time (P < 0.01) and was less invasive (P < 0.01) than the nerve conduction studies. CONCLUSIONS: Intra-epidermal electrical stimulation is a non-invasive and easy measurement of small fibre pain threshold values. It may be clinically useful for C fibre measurement to diagnose early DPN as defined by the Diabetic Neuropathy Study Group in Japan criteria.

The effect of group-based lifestyle interventions on risk factors and insulin resistance in subjects at risk for metabolic syndrome: the Tabaruzaka Study 1.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of two group-based lifestyle interventions in ameliorating the risk factors of metabolic syndrome (MS) and insulin resistance. METHODS: Ninety-eight subjects who had at least one component of MS were randomized into standard intervention (SI) (4-month intervention; n = 50) and extended intervention (EI) (10-month intervention; n = 48) groups, and 39 subjects were followed up for a control group. The effects of intervention were evaluated after 10, 22 and 34 months. RESULTS: At month 10, the standard and EI groups showed improved body mass index (BMI) (SI, -0.28; EI, -0.47; control, -0.09), high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, fasting plasma glucose and A1c and a decreased mean number of components of MS (SI, -0.37; EI, -0.51; control, 0.08). At month 34, the effects on BMI (SI, -0.66; EI, -0.60; control, -0.05) and HDL-cholesterol were sustained for both the intervention groups. In controls, the increases in fasting plasma glucose and the mean number of components of MS from the baseline to month 34 were greater than those in the standard and EI groups. Whole body insulin sensitivity index and hepatic insulin resistance index were also improved at month 10. CONCLUSIONS: Group-based lifestyle intervention could be an efficient way to prevent MS. Its effects were sustainable, at least in part, for 2 years. These effects may be mediated by an improvement in insulin sensitivity.