糖尿病周围神经病变治疗概况

糖尿病神经病变（DPN）是糖尿病较为常见的慢性并发症之一,约50%的糖尿病可罹患糖尿病神经病变。糖尿病性神经病变的治疗仍较为棘手,迄今尚无安全有效的治疗方法。本文对目前糖尿病神经病变的治疗情况综述。     

糖尿病周围神经病变发病机制研究进展

糖尿病周围神经病变（diabetic peripheral neuropathy,DPN）是糖尿病（diabetic mellitus,DM）最常见的慢性并发症之一,可累及感觉神经、运动神经和自主神经,但以感觉神经最为常见。国外研究发现,在DM发生之前的葡萄糖耐量异常（IGT）阶段,DPN的发生率逐渐增高,在25%～90%不等,     

糖尿病周围神经病变相关药物治疗

糖尿病神经病变是糖尿病最常见的慢性并发症之一,病变可累及中枢神经及周围神经,后者尤为常见,约28%的糖尿病患者有周围神经病变的证据。糖尿病周围神经病变病(DPN)发病机制比较复杂,包括高血糖毒性所致多元醇旁路的激活、非酶促糖基化产物(AGE)的沉积、局部血流微循环障碍、脂代谢紊乱、氧自由基损伤、免疫失调以及神经营养因子的缺乏等。临床治疗亦比较棘手,但首先要控制好血糖。目前临床上对DPN治疗药物:①改善微循环药物治疗如前列地尔(凯时)、尼莫地平(钙离子拮抗剂)、山莨菪碱(654-2)等;②营养神经药物治疗如甲钴胺(甲基维生素B12)、神经生长因子、爱维治等;③改善代谢药物治疗如醛糖还原酶抑制剂-依帕司他、抗氧化应激药物-a-硫辛酸、依达拉奉等等。另外有些中药在治疗DPN中亦均有很好疗效。     

糖尿病周围神经病变患者护理研究进展

糖尿病病程长,多数患者均出现不同程度的并发症,糖尿病周围神经病变(DPN)是最常见的并发症之一。在给予糖尿病周围神经病变患者治疗的同时,系统、有针对性的精心护理,不但有利于提高患者的药物治疗效果,还有助于贯切执行教育与心理治疗、运动治疗、饮食治疗和病情监测相结合的最新治疗原则。本文对DPN的发病机制、诊断和治疗进行了概述,对DPN的护理研究进展进行了综述,旨在提高对该病的治疗和护理水平。     

普鲁卡因治疗糖尿病周围神经病变临床观察

近年来我们应用普鲁卡因治疗糖尿病神经病变30例，疗效显著，现报告如下。     

光量子治疗糖尿病周围神经病变的临床观察

糖尿病并发周围神经病变患病率达 60 %～ 90 % ,我们利用肌电图 [运动传导速度 (ＭＣＶ)、感觉传导速度 (ＳＣＶ)、体感诱发电位 (ＳＥＰ) ]做为诊断和判定疗效指标 ,观察光量子治疗糖尿病性周围神经病变的疗效。对象与方法1.对象 :全部病例均为 2型糖尿病患者 ,诊断符合ＷＨＯ诊断标准 ,经神经传导速度测定 ,排除其它疾病 ,诊断为 2型糖尿病周围神经病变 60例 ,其中 2 3例为无神经病变症状及体征的患者 ,随机分为观察组 3 0例 ,男性 11例 ,女性 19例 ,平均年龄5 5 .6岁 ,糖尿病病程平均 3 .7年 ,神经病变病 0～ 3年 ;对照组3 0例 ,男性 8例…     

糖尿病性周围神经病变的中西医治疗

糖尿病周围神经病变是糖尿病最常见的并发症之一,其发生率高达60%以上,也是糖尿病致残的主要原因之一,根据临床的表现,糖尿病周围神经病变与中医消渴病痹痿是一致的。     

银杏叶制剂治疗糖尿病周围神经病变的疗效观察

糖尿病神经病变是糖尿病最常见的并发症 ,发病率达 6 0 %～ 90 % [1 ] ,可累及全身神经系统的任何部分 ,迄今无较有效的治疗方法。银杏叶制剂 (EGB)是近年开发治疗心脑血管疾病的药物 ,我们试用其治疗糖尿病周围神经病变 (DPN)患者 ,以探讨其疗效。对象与方法1.对象 :96例病人男 5 7例 ,女 39例 ;年龄 34～ 6 7岁 ,平均 5 1岁。糖尿病史 8个月～ 16年 ,平均 6 .7年。均为 2型糖尿病。诊断标准 :1符合 WHO糖尿病诊断标准。 2有四肢末梢感觉异常及 /或感觉障碍 ,膝、跟腱反射减弱或消失 ,并排除其它原因所致神经病变。 3神经电生理检查 :…     

Newer agents for the treatment of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy

Neuropathic pain is responsible for a significant amount of the morbidity associated with generalized and focal peripheral neuropathies in diabetes. It is a consequence of alterations in neuronal function, chemistry, and structure that occur secondary to nerve injury. A variety of agents from diverse pharmacologic classes, the so-called adjuvant analgesics, have been used to treat neuropathic pain. These include antidepressants, first- and second-generation anticonvulsants, antiarrhythmic agents, topical agents, N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonists, and the opioid analgesics. The availability of several newer agents, used alone or in combination, has resulted in the successful alleviation of neuropathic pain in many patients. Recent advances in the understanding of pain mechanisms at multiple central nervous system levels should pave the way toward more effective treatment modalities with less prominent side effects.     

A survey of treatment practices in diabetic peripheral neuropathy

ObjectiveTo evaluate provider practices for identification and treatment of painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN).MethodsA questionnaire was distributed to healthcare providers attending educational programs in New England.ResultsThe survey was completed by 357 providers. Although generally ineffective in neuropathic pain, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were prescribed by 31% of providers. Only 57% providers used a quantitative pain scale to evaluate pain. The effectiveness of medications was assessed at least frequently by 70% of providers and at every visit by 22% providers.ConclusionThe results reiterate the need for routinely monitoring patients with painful DPN and using appropriate pain scales.     

糖尿病周围神经病变的诊断方法

糖尿病周围神经病变( DPN)难以治愈,不仅影响患者生活质量,还易造成其足部疼痛、溃疡、截肢等不良后果.现有的DPN诊断方法或对早期病变灵敏度低,如临床评分方法、单丝检测;或为侵入性检查,如皮肤活检、神经活检,亟需灵敏、简单、有效且安全的方法.一些新的诊断技术如泌汗功能检测、足底压力测定、角膜共聚焦显微镜等也已在临床上开始应用.     

Effect of gangliosides on diabetic peripheral neuropathy

The effect of subcutaneously injected gangliosides on diabetic peripheral neuropathy was assessed in 26 diabetic patients with neuropathy, 20 of whom received 100 mg daily 5 days per week for 12 weeks in a randomised single-blind cross-over placebo-controlled study and six of whom, with painful neuropathy, received the same quantity of gangliosides for the same length of time but no placebo. Subjective symptoms of lower limb neuropathy improved on gangliosides but not on placebo (P = 0.01). The amplitude of the peroneal nerve muscle action potential increased on gangliosides and declined on placebo (P = 0.05), but no other significant changes were observed in nerve conduction or in any other measurable sign of lower limb somatic nerve function or of cardiovascular autonomic function.     

糖尿病周围神经病相关发病机制研究进展

糖尿病周围神经病（DPN）作为糖尿病最常见的并发症,一定程度上表现为周围神经功能障碍,影响患者的生活质量。基于近年来国内外对DPN相关发病机制的研究,本文主要围绕DPN在代谢、免疫、基因、降糖药等方面的相关发病机制展开综述,为今后DPN的机制研究与治疗提供思路。     

Ganglioside treatment in diabetic peripheral neuropathy: A multicenter trial

Summary Ganglioside treatment was evaluated with a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled, cross-overvs placebo trial in 140 insulin-treated diabetic subjects with peripheral neuropathy. The patients entered the study when they showed an impairment in at least two of the electroneurographic parameters, and were assigned to two protocols according to the presence and severity of their neurological symptoms. Ninety-seven diabetic subjects with no or mild symptoms were assigned to protocol I, whereas 43 symptomatic patients were assigned to protocol II. The treatment periods lasted 6 weeks with an intermediate washout period of 4 weeks. The treatment consisted in the daily i.m. administration of 20 mg gangliosides or of placebo. Electroneurographic parameters were recorded at the beginning and at the end of each treatment period, whereas clinical and metabolic data (mean daily plasma glucose, glycosuria and glycosylated hemoglobin) were evaluated every three weeks in protocol I and every two weeks in protocol II. No change in the metabolic parameters was observed throughout the trial period. However, the treatment induced a statistically significant improvement of paresthesias (protocol II) and of some electrophysiological parameters; in particular, ganglioside treatment improved MCV of peroneal nerve (p<0.03) in patients of protocol I, MCV of ulnar nerve (p<0.002) and SCV of median nerve (p<0.06) in patients of protocol II. Furthermore, 22 subjects of protocol II showed a ‘drug preference’ while 10 preferred placebo and 9 had no preference. In conclusion, ganglioside treatment seems to have a positive effect on diabetic peripheral neuropathy, improving both some symptoms and some electrophysiological parameters.     

痛性糖尿病周围神经病变的临床治疗进展

痛性糖尿病周围神经病变(PDPN)是一种常见的较难治疗的糖尿病并发症,疼痛症状常导致患者抑郁和生活质量下降.治疗主要是针对潜在疾病,要控制好血糖,防止神经病变进展.缓解疼痛是治疗糖尿病周围神经病变(DPN)的重点与难点.目前疗法主要包括药物和物理治疗.药物主要有抗氧化剂、神经营养因子、抗抑郁药、抗癫痫药、抗心律失常药、麻醉类镇痛药及中药等.新一代药物不良反应较少,为治疗PDPN提供了新的选择.本文就其治疗的进展及机制作一综述.     

普瑞巴林治疗糖尿病痛性周围神经病变的疗效观察

目的 评价普瑞巴林治疗糖尿病痛性周围神经病变的疗效和安全性. 方法 入选T2DM患者60例,随机分为普瑞巴林组和阿米替林组,每组各30例.共观察4周.治疗开始和4周时测定血生化及周围神经传导速度,每日行疼痛强度数字分级法（NRS）评估,并记录药物不良反应.计算两组治疗4周时疼痛缓解≥50％的发生率. 结果 治疗后两组FPG、LDL-C较治疗前下降（P＜0.05）,但两组间比较差异无统计学意义.治疗前后主要终点指标NRS评分,普瑞巴林组为（5.2±1.4）vs（1.3±1.2）分;阿米替林组为（4.9±0.9）vs（2.2±1.3）分（P均＜0.01）.4周时普瑞巴林组NRS低于阿米替林组（P＜0.05）.普瑞巴林组和阿米替林组疼痛缓解≥50％的发生率为75.9％ vs 50.0％（P＜0.05）.普瑞巴林组头痛1例,心悸1例;阿米替林组头晕1例,嗜睡5例,便秘1例,水肿1例. 结论 普瑞巴林和阿米替林均可缓解糖尿病痛性周围神经病变,且普瑞巴林更有效、起效更快.     

Clinical significance of apelin in the treatment of type 2 diabetic peripheral neuropathy

Background:Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) is one of the most common chronic complications of diabetes. As apelin is an adipocytokine closely associated with diabetes, this study explored the clinical significance of serum apelin levels in patients with type 2 DPN before and after treatment.Methods:In total, 44 patients with T2DM without DPN (non-DPN group), 41 patients with DPN who received antihyperglycemic treatment (DPN-A group), 44 patients with DPN who received antihyperglycemic treatment combined with nutritional neurotherapy (DPN-B group), and 40 healthy control individuals (NC group) were selected continuously enrolled in the present study. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) were performed to determine serum levels of apelin and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α). Related apelin, fasting blood glucose (FBG), glycosylated hemoglobin A1c, TNF-α, body mass index, fasting C peptide, and nerve conduction velocity (NCV) were recorded in each group before and after treatment.Results:Serum levels of apelin and TNF-α were higher in patients with diabetes than those in the NC group, as well as in the DPN group as compared to the non-DPN group; furthermore, some NCV values were significantly reduced in the DPN group. After treatment, the serum levels of apelin, TNF-α, and FBG reduced in patients with diabetes; moreover, apelin levels were found significantly lower in the DPN-B group as compared to the DPN-A group, while some NCV values significantly increased in the DPN-B group. Apelin was negatively correlated with part of NCV values and positively correlated with TNF-α and FBG (P < .01).Conclusion:Our results show that the increase in serum apelin levels is an important clinical reference index for DPN, while a decrease indicates that the DPN treatment is effective.