{"title":"1 型和 2 型糖尿病患者的自律神经症状问卷 COMPASS 31 与心血管自律神经测试的关系是否存在差异？","authors":"Ilenia D'Ippolito, Marika Menduni, Cinzia D'Amato, Aikaterini Andreadi, Davide Lauro, Vincenza Spallone","doi":"10.4093/dmj.2023.0301","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim was to investigate if autonomic symptoms questionnaire Composite Autonomic Symptom Score (COMPASS) 31 has different association with cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) and diagnostic performance between type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seventy-nine participants with T1DM and 140 with T2DM completed COMPASS 31 before cardiovascular reflex tests (CARTs) for CAN, and assessment of symptoms, signs, vibration, and thermal perception thresholds for diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>COMPASS 31 total weighted score (TWS) was similar in the two groups, but significantly associated with confirmed CAN only in T1DM (P=0.0056) and not T2DM group (P=0.1768) and correlated with CARTs score more strongly in T1DM (rho=0.356, P=0.0016) than in T2DM group (rho=0.084, P=0.3218) (P=0.016). Only in T1DM and not T2DM group, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) reached a fair diagnostic accuracy (>0.7) for confirmed CAN (0.73±0.07 vs. 0.61±0.08) and DPN (0.75±0.06 vs. 0.68±0.05), although without a significant difference. COMPASS 31 TWS (cut-off 16.44) reached acceptable diagnostic performance in T1DM, with sensitivity for confirmed CAN 81.2% and sensitivity and specificity for DPN 76.3% and 78%, compared to T2DM group (all <70%). AUC for DPN of orthostatic intolerance domain was higher in T1DM compared to T2DM group (0.73±0.05 vs. 0.58±0.04, P=0.027).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>COMPASS 31 is more weakly related to CAN in T2DM than in T1DM, with a fair diagnostic accuracy for confirmed CAN only in T1DM. This difference supports a multifactorial origin of symptoms and should be considered when using COMPASS 31.</p>","PeriodicalId":11153,"journal":{"name":"Diabetes & Metabolism Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does the Relationship of the Autonomic Symptoms Questionnaire COMPASS 31 with Cardiovascular Autonomic Tests Differ between Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus?\",\"authors\":\"Ilenia D'Ippolito, Marika Menduni, Cinzia D'Amato, Aikaterini Andreadi, Davide Lauro, Vincenza Spallone\",\"doi\":\"10.4093/dmj.2023.0301\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim was to investigate if autonomic symptoms questionnaire Composite Autonomic Symptom Score (COMPASS) 31 has different association with cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) and diagnostic performance between type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Seventy-nine participants with T1DM and 140 with T2DM completed COMPASS 31 before cardiovascular reflex tests (CARTs) for CAN, and assessment of symptoms, signs, vibration, and thermal perception thresholds for diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>COMPASS 31 total weighted score (TWS) was similar in the two groups, but significantly associated with confirmed CAN only in T1DM (P=0.0056) and not T2DM group (P=0.1768) and correlated with CARTs score more strongly in T1DM (rho=0.356, P=0.0016) than in T2DM group (rho=0.084, P=0.3218) (P=0.016). Only in T1DM and not T2DM group, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) reached a fair diagnostic accuracy (>0.7) for confirmed CAN (0.73±0.07 vs. 0.61±0.08) and DPN (0.75±0.06 vs. 0.68±0.05), although without a significant difference. COMPASS 31 TWS (cut-off 16.44) reached acceptable diagnostic performance in T1DM, with sensitivity for confirmed CAN 81.2% and sensitivity and specificity for DPN 76.3% and 78%, compared to T2DM group (all <70%). AUC for DPN of orthostatic intolerance domain was higher in T1DM compared to T2DM group (0.73±0.05 vs. 0.58±0.04, P=0.027).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>COMPASS 31 is more weakly related to CAN in T2DM than in T1DM, with a fair diagnostic accuracy for confirmed CAN only in T1DM. This difference supports a multifactorial origin of symptoms and should be considered when using COMPASS 31.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11153,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Diabetes & Metabolism Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Diabetes & Metabolism Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4093/dmj.2023.0301\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetes & Metabolism Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4093/dmj.2023.0301","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景：目的：研究自律神经症状问卷综合自律神经症状评分（COMPASS）31是否与心血管自律神经病变（CAN）以及1型糖尿病（T1DM）和2型糖尿病（T2DM）之间的诊断结果有不同的关联：79名T1DM患者和140名T2DM患者在进行心血管反射测试（CARTs）检测CAN和症状、体征、振动和热感知阈值评估以诊断糖尿病多发性神经病变（DPN）之前完成了COMPASS 31：两组患者的 COMPASS 31 总加权得分（TWS）相似，但只有 T1DM 组（P=0.0056）与确诊的 CAN 显著相关，T2DM 组（P=0.1768）与确诊的 CAN 无关，且 T1DM 组（rho=0.356，P=0.0016）比 T2DM 组（rho=0.084，P=0.3218）与 CARTs 得分的相关性更强（P=0.016）。只有在 T1DM 组（而非 T2DM 组），接收器操作特征曲线下面积（AUC）对确诊的 CAN（0.73±0.07 vs. 0.61±0.08）和 DPN（0.75±0.06 vs. 0.68±0.05）达到了相当的诊断准确性（>0.7），但无显著差异。与 T2DM 组相比，COMPASS 31 TWS（临界值 16.44）在 T1DM 中的诊断效果尚可，对确诊 CAN 的灵敏度为 81.2%，对 DPN 的灵敏度和特异性分别为 76.3% 和 78%（所有结论：COMPASS 31 TWS 与 T2DM 组的相关性较弱）：与 T1DM 相比，COMPASS 31 与 T2DM 中的 CAN 的相关性更弱，仅对 T1DM 中的确诊 CAN 具有相当的诊断准确性。这一差异支持症状的多因素来源，在使用 COMPASS 31 时应加以考虑。
Does the Relationship of the Autonomic Symptoms Questionnaire COMPASS 31 with Cardiovascular Autonomic Tests Differ between Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus?
Background: The aim was to investigate if autonomic symptoms questionnaire Composite Autonomic Symptom Score (COMPASS) 31 has different association with cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) and diagnostic performance between type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).
Methods: Seventy-nine participants with T1DM and 140 with T2DM completed COMPASS 31 before cardiovascular reflex tests (CARTs) for CAN, and assessment of symptoms, signs, vibration, and thermal perception thresholds for diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) diagnosis.
Results: COMPASS 31 total weighted score (TWS) was similar in the two groups, but significantly associated with confirmed CAN only in T1DM (P=0.0056) and not T2DM group (P=0.1768) and correlated with CARTs score more strongly in T1DM (rho=0.356, P=0.0016) than in T2DM group (rho=0.084, P=0.3218) (P=0.016). Only in T1DM and not T2DM group, the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) reached a fair diagnostic accuracy (>0.7) for confirmed CAN (0.73±0.07 vs. 0.61±0.08) and DPN (0.75±0.06 vs. 0.68±0.05), although without a significant difference. COMPASS 31 TWS (cut-off 16.44) reached acceptable diagnostic performance in T1DM, with sensitivity for confirmed CAN 81.2% and sensitivity and specificity for DPN 76.3% and 78%, compared to T2DM group (all <70%). AUC for DPN of orthostatic intolerance domain was higher in T1DM compared to T2DM group (0.73±0.05 vs. 0.58±0.04, P=0.027).
Conclusion: COMPASS 31 is more weakly related to CAN in T2DM than in T1DM, with a fair diagnostic accuracy for confirmed CAN only in T1DM. This difference supports a multifactorial origin of symptoms and should be considered when using COMPASS 31.
期刊介绍：
The aims of the Diabetes & Metabolism Journal are to contribute to the cure of and education about diabetes mellitus, and the advancement of diabetology through the sharing of scientific information on the latest developments in diabetology among members of the Korean Diabetes Association and other international societies.
The Journal publishes articles on basic and clinical studies, focusing on areas such as metabolism, epidemiology, pathogenesis, complications, and treatments relevant to diabetes mellitus. It also publishes articles covering obesity and cardiovascular disease. Articles on translational research and timely issues including ubiquitous care or new technology in the management of diabetes and metabolic disorders are welcome. In addition, genome research, meta-analysis, and randomized controlled studies are welcome for publication.
The editorial board invites articles from international research or clinical study groups. Publication is determined by the editors and peer reviewers, who are experts in their specific fields of diabetology.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
