Abstract
Background Diabetes is one of the leading causes of noncommunicable diseases worldwide. It is known to induce cardiovascular remodeling, which can result in a variety of complications, including a considerable increase in aortic stiffness. While studies in Western populations have explored these effects, data on Asians, particularly Vietnamese, are limited. This study aimed to assess aortic elasticity in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients compared to healthy individuals.
Methods
Aortic elasticity indices were measured using M-mode echocardiography. A comparison between the healthy group and the T2DM group revealed substantial differences in aortic elasticity indices.
Results
The aortic stiffness index (ASI) was significantly greater in the T2DM group than in the control group, with median values of 6.10 (3.64-12.47) and 3.79 (2.40-8.50), respectively (p = 0.003). Aortic strain (AS) was substantially lower in the T2DM group than in the control group, with median values of 8.21 (4.24 - 13.07) and 10.66 (6.01 - 18.23), respectively (p = 0.039). Furthermore, the median aortic compliance (AC) and aortic distensibility (AD) in individuals with T2DM were 4.07 (2.28-7.44) and 3.08 (1.57-5.26), respectively, lower than those in the control group, with median values of 6.40 (3.08-10.75) and 5.33 (2.80-9.79), respectively. A longer diabetes duration was linked to a greater ASI (r = 0.43, p < 0.05), while the AS decreased (r = -0.37, p < 0.05).
Conclusions
Substantial variations in aorta elasticity indices were found using M-mode echocardiography. More research is needed to investigate the consequences of these discrepancies and their significance for clinical purposes.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Not Applicable
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The research described received approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) or oversight body, specifically, The Institutional Ethics Committee of Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy. The approval number for this study is H2022/025. Professor Vo Tam serves as the Chairman of the committee, while Associate Professor Nguyen Thanh Thao holds the position of Secretary.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Not Applicable
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Not Applicable
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Not Applicable
Footnotes
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Data Availability
Data cannot be shared publicly due to certain local ethical constraints. Researchers who meet the criteria for access to confidential data may contact the author, Hai Nguyen Ngoc Dang (via email at ngochai123dc{at}gmail.com or dangnngochai{at}dtu.edu.vn)
Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below.
Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure
cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can
have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy
(via DOI)
is the canonical version.