Profile
International Journal of Diabetes & Clinical Diagnosis Volume 1 (2014), Article ID 1:IJDCD-107, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.15344/2394-1499/2014/107
Research Article
Effects of Epalrestat as Aldose Reductase Inhibitor (ARI), Sitagliptin as Incretin-Based Therapy (IBT), or Combined Epalrestat and Sitagliptin on Cardiac Vagal Neuropathy (CVN) in Patients with Type 2 Diabetic Mellitus

Kyuzi Kamoi1-4* and Hideo Sasaki5,6

1The Center of Diabetes and Endocrine & Metabolism Disease, Nagaoka Red Cross Hospital, Nagaoka, Niigata 940-2085, Japan
2Mitsuke City Hospital, Mitsuke, Niigata 954-0052, Japan
3Ojiya General Hospital, Ojiya, Niigata 947-8601, Japan
4Former Professor of University of Niigata Prefecture, Niigata, Niigata, 950-8680, Japan
5Emeritus Professors, Yamagata University Faculty of Medicine, Yamagata, Yamagata 990-9585, Japan
6Diabetes Clinic, Kuriyama Central Hospital, Yotukaido, Chiba 286-0027, Japan
Dr. Kyuzi Kamoi, Department of Medicine, Joetsu General Hospital, Joetsu, Niigata 943-8502, Japan; E-mail: kkam-int@echigo.ne.jp
26 September 2014; 11 November 2014; 13 November 2014
Kamoi K, Sasaki H (2014) Effects of Epalrestat as Aldose Reductase Inhibitor (ARI), Sitagliptin as Incretin-Based Therapy (IBT), or Combined Epalrestat and Sitagliptin on Cardiac Vagal Neuropathy (CVN) in Patients with Type 2 Diabetic Mellitus. Int J Diabetes Clin Diagn 1: 107. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.15344/2394-1499/2014/107

Abstract

Background: Aldose reductase inhibitor (ARI) partially ameliorates cardiac vagal neuropathy (CVN) in patients with diabetes mellitus. Incretin-based therapy (IBT) has neuroprotective properties for neuropathy in mice and rat.

Materials and Methods: Effects of epalrestat as ARI, sitaglipitin as IBT, or combined ARI and IBT on CVN were examined in 42 patients with CVN and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Subjects were divided into 3 groups; group A (n =12) was treated with add-on oral epalrestat; group B (n =18) was treated with addon oral sitaglipitin; and group C (n = 12) with CVN despite treatment with epalrestat (n=6) for 1 year in group A , sitagliptin (n=5) for 1 year in group B and subcutaneously injected exenatide (n = 1) as IBT for 1 year was treated with add-on combined epalrestat and sitaglipitin, although there were no placebo in all patients with CVN. CVN was defined as maximal coefficient of variance in electrocardiographic beatto- beat interval (max CV. R-R) of three measurements during deep breathing at rest on ≤2.00%. Since disease duration was ≥20 years in each group, patient had various chronic complications and various treatments.

Results: Mean duration of treatment was 1 year. Max CV.R-R after treatment was significantly (P<0.001) increased after treatment in each group. Nevertheless, 8 (67%) and 5 patients (28%) still had CVN after treatment in groups A and B, respectively, whereas no patients had CVN after treatment in group C. There was significant difference (P <0.002) in magnitude increase of max CV. R-R after treatment between groups using ANOVA with multiple comparison test. No significant differences were observed in other variables before and after treatment between groups.

Conclusion: Sitagliptin may be more effective than epalrestat for CVN in type 2 diabetic patients, and combined epalrestat and sitagliptin may be haven a synergistic effect.