Type of Diabetes Mellitus Has Influence on Electrophysiological Parameters

• Published in: Acta informatica medica 2019-06, Vol.27 (2), p.108-113
• Main Authors: Suljic, Enra, Drnda, Senad
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Amplitudes; Diabetes; Diabetes mellitus; Median nerve; Original Paper; Parameter sensitivity; Peripheral nerves; Polynomials; Reflexes; Signs and symptoms
• ISSN: 0353-8109; 1986-5988
• DOI: 10.5455/aim.2019.27.108-113

Compulsory electromyoneurography (EMNG) analysis of all neurophysiological parameters, including the most sensitive parameter for early detection of diabetic polyneuropathy (cutaneous silent periods), in patients without subjective symptoms, and EMNG analysis demonstrates the existence of incipient signs for polynomial neuropathy due to which timely therapeutic approach is needed to prevent complications of diabetic disease and prevent irreversible changes in peripheral nerves. Examine the influence of type diabetes mellitus, therapeutic modality, and gender of patients on neurophysiological parameters obtained by EMNG analysis. The study included 90 patients with diabetes who were divided into three groups of 30, depending on the duration of the disease. Group 1 consisted of 30 respondents with type 2 diabetes mellitus and up to 5 years of disease duration. Group 2 consisted of 30 respondents with type 2 diabetes mellitus type and 5 to 10 years of disease duration. Group 3 consisted of 30 respondents with Type 1 diabetes mellitus. An electron-neurography analysis of peripheral nerve in the extremities was performed. Group 1 (50%) and group 2 (56.17%) respondents had statistically higher incidence of tingling than those in Group 3 (13.3%), p=0.004. Tingling was not statistically significantly different in relation to the examined groups (p=0.314). Reflexes were statistically the most preserved in Group 3 (86.7%), p = 0.001. Measurement of motor conductivity values at median nerve had a significant difference in all parameters (distal latency, amplitude, mean conduction velocity (MCV) and latency in the group with DM type 1, compared to respondents with DM type 2. The same significant difference between all parameters was found when testing peroneus nerve. When measuring motor velocity conductivity in ulnar nerve, there was no significant difference in amplitude, while DM1 type 1 patients had significant differences in values: distal latency and MCV p