Poor lipid control in type-2 diabetics with and without ischemic heart disease.

Department of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University Hospital, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
Endocrine (Impact Factor: 2.25). 08/2003; 21(3):217-20. DOI: 10.1385/ENDO:21:3:217
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To determine the frequency of type-2 diabetics who have target lipoprotein blood levels, to study these levels in patients with ischemic heart disease and cardiovascular disease risk factors, and to study the possible causes of poor control, we reviewed hyperlipdemic type-2 diabetics who were on regular follow up to the medical outpatient clinic of King Abdulaziz University Hospital from January 2000 to January 2001. A total of 202 patients were studied with mean age of 60 yr and equal male to female ratio. The mean duration of diabetes was 10 yr and it was 7 yr for hyperlipidemia. The mean level of LDL was 3.15 mmol/L and it was 1.0 mmol/L and 2.47 mmol/L for HDL and TG, respectively. Only 31% of patients had LDL < 2.6 mmol/L, 28% had HDL > 1.1 mmol/L, and 37% had TG < 1.7 mmol/L. No significant difference was found in the frequency of target level of LDL in patients with IHD and those without; 26% vs 34% (0.4). Similarly, no difference was found in those with hypertension, obesity, and patients with family history of IHD compared to those without these risk factors; 30%, 26%, 16% vs 34%, 36%, 33% (p = 0.2, 0.1, 0.4, respectively). Males were found to have a higher frequency of target LDL level compared to females; 38% vs 25% (p = 0.04). Poor diet restriction was found in 90% of patients' with poor control, lack of patients' knowledge in 62%, 70% have financial reasons, 86% of patients on multiple medications, and in 16% the treating physician took no proper action. In conclusion, a low frequency of type-2 diabetics have target levels of lipoproteins. Diabetics with IHD and CVD risk factors also have poor lipid control. Poor control was associated with poor diet compliance and use of multiple medications. Proper management and control of this disease is needed among elderly patients.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a growing, worldwide public health concern. Recent growth has been particularly dramatic in the states of The Co-operation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC), and these and other developing economies are at particular risk. We aimed to systematically review the quality of control of type 2 diabetes in the GCC, and the nature and efficacy of interventions. We identified 27 published studies for review. Studies were identified by systematic database searches. Medline and Embase were searched separately (via Dialog and Ovid, respectively; 1950 to July 2010 (Medline), and 1947 to July 2010 (Embase)) on 15/07/2009. The search was updated on 08/07/2010. Terms such as diabetes mellitus, non-insulin-dependent, hyperglycemia, hypertension, hyperlipidemia and Gulf States were used. Our search also included scanning reference lists, contacting experts and hand-searching key journals. Studies were judged against pre-determined inclusion/exclusion criteria, and where suitable for inclusion, data extraction/quality assessment was achieved using a specifically-designed tool. All studies wherein glycaemic-, blood pressure- and/or lipid- control were investigated (clinical and/or process outcomes) were eligible for inclusion. No limitations on publication type, publication status, study design or language of publication were imposed. We found the extent of control to be sub-optimal and relatively poor. Assessment of the efficacy of interventions was difficult due to lack of data, but suggestive that more widespread and controlled trial of secondary prevention strategies may have beneficial outcomes. We found no record of audited implementation of primary preventative strategies and anticipate that controlled trial of such strategies would also be useful.
    PLoS ONE 01/2011; 6(8):e22186. · 3.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: AIM: The aims of the present study were to assess the control of glycemia and other cardiovascular disease risk factors, and the association between age and these controls among older adults with type 2 diabetes in Malaysia. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out using cases notified to the Adult Diabetes Control and Management database between 1 January and 31 December 2009. A total of 10 363 people aged over 60 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus were included in the analyses. A standard online case report form was used to record demographic data, clinical factors (diabetes duration, comorbid condition and treatment modalities), cardiovascular disease risk factors, diabetes complications and laboratory assessments. The cardiovascular disease risk factors controls assessed included glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c ) <7.0%, blood pressure, body mass index, waist circumference and lipid profiles. RESULTS: The proportion of older adults who achieved target HbA1c (<7.0%) was 41.7%. A greater proportion of older adults aged ≥80 years significantly achieved the targets of HbA1c <7% (P < 0.001), waist circumference (P < 0.001), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <2.6 mmol/L (P = 0.007) and triglycerides <1.7 mmol/L (P = 0.001) when compared with the younger elderly groups. They were also associated with achieving target HbA1c <7.0% (OR = 1.90, 95% CI 1.68-2.26) and triglycerides <1.7 mmol/L (OR = 1.20, 95%CI 1.04-1.46) than those aged 60-69 years. CONCLUSION: The control of cardiovascular disease risk factors was suboptimal in older adults with type 2 diabetes. The oldest elderly were more likely to achieve target HbA1c (<7.0%) and triglycerides (<1.7 mmol/L) than older adults aged 60-69 years. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2013; ●●: ●●-●●.
    Geriatrics & Gerontology International 04/2013;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Activation of the polyol pathway due to increased aldo-keto reductase (AKR) activity has been implicated in the development of diabetic complications, including proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR); however, the relationship between hyperglycaemia-induced activation of the polyol pathway in the retina and PDR is still uncertain. METHODS: This study was conducted on 73 individuals, who were categorised into three groups: healthy individuals as normal control (15 age-matched subjects), diabetic patients treated with oral hypoglycaemic drugs (OHD, 34 patients), six of whom (17.7 per cent) were diagnosed with PDR and the rest were diagnosed with non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) and diabetic patients treated with insulin (INS, 24 patients), 12 of whom (50 per cent) were diagnosed with PDR and the rest had NPDR. RESULTS: The AKR level in diabetic subjects showed a significant increase compared with the normal controls. Interestingly, AKR levels were significantly increased in the INS compared with the OHD group. Also the AKR level was significantly increased in the patients with proliferative compared with the non-proliferative retinopathy in both the insulin and oral diabetic groups. The sorbitol dehydrogenase (SDH) level in diabetic patients showed a significant decrease compared with the normal control level. Interestingly, the SDH level was significantly decreased in the INS compared with the OHD group. Also, the SDH level was significantly decreased in patients with proliferative compared with non-proliferative retinopathy in both INS and OHD groups. The HbA1c level in both INS and OHD subjects showed a significant increase compared with normal controls. In addition, the triglyceride level in insulin proliferative retinopathy showed a significant increase compared with other groups. CONCLUSIONS: The AKR level was significantly increased in patients with proliferative compared with non-proliferative retinopathy in both insulin and oral diabetic groups. The SDH level was significantly decreased in patients with proliferative compared with non-proliferative retinopathy in both insulin and oral diabetic groups. Both AKR and SDH could be used as indicators for diabetic control.
    Clinical and Experimental Optometry 03/2013; · 0.92 Impact Factor