RESUMO
AIM: To evaluate the impact of pioglitazone pharmacotherapy in median nerve electrophysiology in the carpal tunnel among type 2 diabetes patients. METHODS: The study was executed in patients with type 2 diabetes, treated with oral drugs, categorized under pioglitazone or non-pioglitazone group (14 in each group), and who received electrophysiological evaluation by nerve conduction velocity at baseline and 3 mo. RESULTS: At 3 mo, pioglitazone-category had inferior amplitude in sensory median nerve [8.5 interquartile range (IQR) = 6.5 to 11.5) vs non-pioglitazone 14.5 (IQR 10.5 to 18.75)] (P = 0.002). Non-pioglitazone category displayed amelioration in amplitude in the sensory median nerve [baseline 13 (IQR = 9 to 16.25) vs 3 mo 8.5 (IQR = 6.5 to 11.5)] (P = 0.01) and amplitude in motor median nerve [baseline 9 (IQR = 4.75 to 11) vs 3 mo 6.75 (IQR = 4.75 to 10.25)] (P = 0.049); and deterioration of terminal latency of in motor ulnar nerve [baseline 2.07 (IQR = 1.92 to 2.25) vs 3 mo 2.16 (IQR = 1.97 to 2.325)] (P = 0.043). There was amelioration of terminal latency in sensory ulnar nerve [baseline 2.45 (IQR = 2.315 to 2.88) vs 3 mo 2.37 (IQR = 2.275 to 2.445) for pioglitazone group (P = 0.038). CONCLUSION: Treatment with pioglitazone accentuates probability of compressive neuropathy. In spite of comparable glycemic control over 3 mo, patients treated with pioglitazone showed superior electrophysiological parameters for the ulnar nerve. Pioglitazone has favourable outcome in nerve electrophysiology which was repealed when the nerve was subjected to compressive neuropathy.
