The Prevalence of Polyneuropathy in Type 2 Diabetes Subgroups Based on HOMA2 Indices of ß-Cell Function and Insulin Sensitivity.

OBJECTIVE: Metabolic syndrome components may cumulatively increase the risk of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients, driven by insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia. We investigated the prevalence of DPN in three T2DM subgroups based on indices of ß-cell function and insulin sensitivity. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We estimated ß-cell function (HOMA2-B) and insulin sensitivity (HOMA2-S) in 4,388 Danish patients with newly diagnosed T2DM. Patients were categorized into subgroups of hyperinsulinemic (high HOMA2-B, low HOMA2-S), classical (low HOMA2-B, low HOMA2-S), and insulinopenic (low HOMA2-B, high HOMA2-S) T2DM. After a median follow-up of 3 years, patients filled the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument questionnaire (MNSIq) to identify DPN (score ≥ 4). We used Poisson regression to calculate adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) for DPN, and spline models to examine the association with HOMA2-B and HOMA2-S. RESULTS: A total of 3,397 (77%) patients filled in the MNSIq. The prevalence of DPN was 23% among hyperinsulinemic, 16% among classical, and 14% among insulinopenic patients. After adjusting for demographics, diabetes duration and therapy, lifestyle behaviors, and metabolic syndrome components (waist circumference, triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, hypertension, and HbA1c), the PR of DPN was 1.35 (95% CI 1.15-1.57) for the hyperinsulinemic compared with the classical patients. In spline analyses, we observed a linear relation of higher DPN prevalence with increasing HOMA2-B, independent of both metabolic syndrome components and HOMA2-S. CONCLUSIONS: Hyperinsulinemia marked by high HOMA2-B is likely an important risk factor for DPN beyond metabolic syndrome components and insulin resistance. This should be considered when developing interventions to prevent DPN.

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.

Can diabetic polyneuropathy and foot ulcers in patients with type 2 diabetes be accurately identified based on ICD-10 hospital diagnoses and drug prescriptions?

Purpose: We examined whether diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) and diabetic foot ulcers in type 2 diabetes can be accurately identified using International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision discharge diagnosis codes, surgery codes, and drug prescription codes. Methods: We identified all type 2 diabetes patients in the Central Denmark region, 2009-2016, who had ≥1 primary/secondary diagnosis code of "diabetes with neurological complication" (E10.4-E14.4), "diabetic polyneuropathy" (G63.2), or "polyneuropathy, unspecified" (G62.9). Patients with potential painful DPN and non-painful DPN were identified based on prescription history for serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, tricyclic antidepressants, or gabapentinoids. Likewise, type 2 diabetes patients with potential foot ulcers were identified based on diagnosis or surgery codes. We used medical record review as the reference standard and calculated positive predictive values (PPVs). Results: Of 53 randomly selected patients with potential painful DPN, 38 were classified as having DPN when validated against medical records; of these, 18 also had neuropathic pain, yielding a PPV of 72% (95% CI: 58-83%) for DPN and 34% (95% CI: 22-48%) for painful DPN. Likewise, among 54 randomly selected patients with potential non-painful DPN, 30 had DPN based on medical record data; of these, 27 had non-painful DPN, yielding PPVs of 56% (95% CI: 41-69%) and 50% (95% CI: 36-64%), respectively. Secondary E-chapter codes often denoted stroke or mononeuropathies, rather than DPN. Excluding secondary E-chapter codes from the algorithm increased the PPV for DPN to 78% (95% CI: 63-89%) for the painful DPN cohort and to 74% (95% CI: 56-87%) for the non-painful DPN cohort. Of 53 randomly selected patients with potential diabetic foot ulcer, only 18 diagnoses were confirmed; PPV=34% (95% CI: 22-48%). Conclusion: G-chapter and primary E-chapter diagnosis codes can detect type 2 diabetes patients with hospital-diagnosed DPN, and may be useful in epidemiological research. In contrast, our diabetic foot ulcer algorithm did not perform well.