The characteristics of pain and dysesthesia in patients with diabetic polyneuropathy.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Patients with diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) may experience paresthesia, dysesthesia, and pain. We aimed to characterize the predictors, symptoms, somatosensory profile, neuropathy severity, and impact of painful DPN and dysesthetic DPN. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional study of type 2 diabetes patients with confirmed DPN, diagnosed using widely accepted methods including a clinical examination, skin biopsy, and nerve conduction studies. FINDINGS: Of 126 patients with confirmed DPN, 52 had DPN without pain or dysesthesia, 21 had dysesthetic DPN, and 53 painful DPN. Patients with painful DPN were less physically active and suffered from more pain elsewhere than in the feet compared to patients with DPN without pain. Patients with painful DPN had the largest loss of small and large sensory fiber function, and there was a gradient of larger spatial distribution of sensory loss from DPN without dysesthesia/pain to dysesthetic DPN and to painful DPN. This could indicate that patients with dysesthesia had more severe neuropathy than patients without dysesthesia but less than patients with painful DPN. Patients with dysesthetic and painful DPN had higher symptom scores for depression and fatigue than those without dysesthesia/pain with no difference between dysesthetic and painful DPN. CONCLUSIONS: There was a gradient of increasing sensory loss from DPN without dysesthesia/pain to dysesthetic DPN and to painful DPN. Pain and dysesthesia are common in DPN and both interfere with daily life. It is therefore important to consider dysesthesia when diagnosing and treating patients with neuropathy.

Analysis of Macrophages and Peptidergic Fibers in the Skin of Patients With Painful Diabetic Polyneuropathy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The mechanisms of pain in patients with diabetic polyneuropathy are unknown. Studies have suggested a role of inflammation and increased neuropeptides peripherally in pain generation. This study examined the possible skin markers of painful diabetic polyneuropathy (P-DPN): macrophages, substance P (SP), and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP). METHODS: The participants were included from a large Danish cross-sectional clinical study of type 2 diabetes. We diagnosed definite diabetic polyneuropathy using the Toronto criteria and used the Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group classification for defining P-DPN. We included 60 skin biopsies from patients with diabetic polyneuropathy-30 with P-DPN and 30 with nonpainful diabetic polyneuropathy (NP-DPN)-and 30 biopsies from healthy controls of similar age and sex. The biopsies were stained using PGP 9.5, IbA1, and SP and CGRP primary markers. RESULTS: There was increased macrophage density in patients with P-DPN (8.0%) compared with that in patients with NP-DPN (5.1%, p < 0.001), and there was increased macrophage density in patients with NP-DPN (5.1%) compared with that in healthy controls (3.1%, p < 0.001). When controlling for neuropathy severity, body mass index, age, and sex, there was still a difference in macrophage density between patients with P-DPN and patients with NP-DPN. Patients with P-DPN had higher median nerve fiber length density (274.5 and 155 mm-2 for SP and CGRP, respectively) compared with patients with NP-DPN (176 and 121 mm-2 for SP and CGRP, respectively, p = 0.009 and 0.04) and healthy controls (185.5 and 121.5 mm-2 for SP and CGRP, respectively), whereas there was no difference between patients with NP-DPN and controls without diabetes (p = 0.64 and 0.49, respectively). The difference between P-DPN and NP-DPN for SP and CGRP was significant only in female patients, although a trend was seen in male patients. DISCUSSION: The findings point to a possible involvement of the innate immune system in the pathogenesis of neuropathic pain in patients with DPN, although markers of activated macrophages were not measured in this study.

Diabetic polyneuropathy and pain, prevalence, and patient characteristics: a cross-sectional questionnaire study of 5,514 patients with recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes.

Most studies of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) and painful DPN are conducted in persons with longstanding diabetes. This cross-sectional study aimed to estimate the prevalence of DPN and painful DPN, important risk factors, and the association with mental health in recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes. A total of 5514 (82%) patients (median diabetes duration 4.6 years) enrolled in the Danish Centre for Strategic Research in Type 2 Diabetes cohort responded to a detailed questionnaire on neuropathy and pain. A score ≥4 on the MNSI questionnaire determined possible DPN, whereas pain presence in both feet together with a score ≥3 on the DN4 questionnaire determined possible painful DPN. The prevalence of possible DPN and possible painful DPN was 18% and 10%, respectively. Female sex, age, diabetes duration, body mass index, and smoking were associated with possible DPN, whereas only smoking showed a clear association with possible painful DPN (odds ratio 1.52 [95% confidence interval: 1.20-1.93]). Possible DPN and painful DPN were independently and additively associated with lower quality of life, poorer sleep, and symptoms of depression and anxiety. Possible DPN itself had greater impact on mental health than neuropathic pain. This large study emphasizes the importance of careful screening for DPN and pain early in the course of type 2 diabetes.

Painful and non-painful diabetic polyneuropathy: Clinical characteristics and diagnostic issues.

Diabetic neuropathy (DN) is a common complication of diabetes and can be either painful or non-painful. It is challenging to diagnose this complication, as no biomarker or clear consensus on the clinical definition of either painful or non-painful DN exists. Hence, a hierarchical classification has been developed categorizing the probability of the diagnosis into: possible, probable or definite, based on the clinical presentation of symptoms and signs. Pain is a warning signal of tissue damage, and non-painful DN therefore represents a clinical and diagnostic challenge because it often goes unnoticed until irreversible nerve damage has occurred. Simple clinical tests seem to be the best for evaluation of DN in the general care for diabetes. Screening programs at regular intervals might be the most optimal strategy for early detection and interventions to possibly prevent further neuronal damage and to lower the economic burden of this complication.