Using corneal confocal microscopy to compare Mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a RCT

Abstract This randomized controlled study used corneal confocal microscopy (CCM) to compare the efficacy of Mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating mild to moderate diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) by detecting early nerve fiber repair. Enrolled patients were randomized...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Yuanjin Zhang, Dongsheng Fan, Yixuan Zhang, Shuo Zhang, Haikun Wang, Ziyuan Liu, Hongli Wang
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Nature Portfolio 2021
Materias:	Medicine R Science Q
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/3b227810c4da4d5eae75b0994a9d0ae4
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:3b227810c4da4d5eae75b0994a9d0ae4
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:3b227810c4da4d5eae75b0994a9d0ae42021-12-02T16:17:34ZUsing corneal confocal microscopy to compare Mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a RCT10.1038/s41598-021-94284-42045-2322https://doaj.org/article/3b227810c4da4d5eae75b0994a9d0ae42021-07-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-94284-4https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322Abstract This randomized controlled study used corneal confocal microscopy (CCM) to compare the efficacy of Mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating mild to moderate diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) by detecting early nerve fiber repair. Enrolled patients were randomized approximately 1:1 to receive Mecobalamin intramuscular injections (0.5 mg/day, 3 times/week) or Mecobalamin oral tablets (1.5 mg/day) for 8 weeks. Primary outcome was change of inferior whorl length (IWL) from baseline. Secondary outcomes included changes of corneal nerve fibre length (CNFL), corneal nerve fibre density (CNFD), corneal nerve branch density (CNBD) and the Survey of Autonomic Symptoms (SAS). 15 (93.75%) patients in the injection group and 17 (89.47%) patients in the tablet group completed the study. The injection treatment significantly improved patients’ IWL from baseline (21.64 ± 3.00 mm/mm2 vs 17.64 ± 4.83 mm/mm2, P < 0.01) while the tablet treatment didn’t. Additionally, the injection treatment led to significantly improved CNFL, CNBD and SAS from baseline (all P < 0.05) while the tablet treatment did not. No patient experienced any adverse events. In conclusion, CCM is sensitive enough to detect the superior efficacy of 8-week Mecobalamin intramuscular injection treatment for DPN compared to the oral tablet treatment. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT04372316 (30/04/2020).Yuanjin ZhangDongsheng FanYixuan ZhangShuo ZhangHaikun WangZiyuan LiuHongli WangNature PortfolioarticleMedicineRScienceQENScientific Reports, Vol 11, Iss 1, Pp 1-10 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Medicine R Science Q
spellingShingle	Medicine R Science Q Yuanjin Zhang Dongsheng Fan Yixuan Zhang Shuo Zhang Haikun Wang Ziyuan Liu Hongli Wang Using corneal confocal microscopy to compare Mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a RCT
description	Abstract This randomized controlled study used corneal confocal microscopy (CCM) to compare the efficacy of Mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating mild to moderate diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) by detecting early nerve fiber repair. Enrolled patients were randomized approximately 1:1 to receive Mecobalamin intramuscular injections (0.5 mg/day, 3 times/week) or Mecobalamin oral tablets (1.5 mg/day) for 8 weeks. Primary outcome was change of inferior whorl length (IWL) from baseline. Secondary outcomes included changes of corneal nerve fibre length (CNFL), corneal nerve fibre density (CNFD), corneal nerve branch density (CNBD) and the Survey of Autonomic Symptoms (SAS). 15 (93.75%) patients in the injection group and 17 (89.47%) patients in the tablet group completed the study. The injection treatment significantly improved patients’ IWL from baseline (21.64 ± 3.00 mm/mm2 vs 17.64 ± 4.83 mm/mm2, P < 0.01) while the tablet treatment didn’t. Additionally, the injection treatment led to significantly improved CNFL, CNBD and SAS from baseline (all P < 0.05) while the tablet treatment did not. No patient experienced any adverse events. In conclusion, CCM is sensitive enough to detect the superior efficacy of 8-week Mecobalamin intramuscular injection treatment for DPN compared to the oral tablet treatment. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT04372316 (30/04/2020).
format	article
author	Yuanjin Zhang Dongsheng Fan Yixuan Zhang Shuo Zhang Haikun Wang Ziyuan Liu Hongli Wang
author_facet	Yuanjin Zhang Dongsheng Fan Yixuan Zhang Shuo Zhang Haikun Wang Ziyuan Liu Hongli Wang
author_sort	Yuanjin Zhang
title	Using corneal confocal microscopy to compare Mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a RCT
title_short	Using corneal confocal microscopy to compare Mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a RCT
title_full	Using corneal confocal microscopy to compare Mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a RCT
title_fullStr	Using corneal confocal microscopy to compare Mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a RCT
title_full_unstemmed	Using corneal confocal microscopy to compare Mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a RCT
title_sort	using corneal confocal microscopy to compare mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a rct
publisher	Nature Portfolio
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/3b227810c4da4d5eae75b0994a9d0ae4
work_keys_str_mv	AT yuanjinzhang usingcornealconfocalmicroscopytocomparemecobalaminintramuscularinjectionsvsoraltabletsintreatingdiabeticperipheralneuropathyarct AT dongshengfan usingcornealconfocalmicroscopytocomparemecobalaminintramuscularinjectionsvsoraltabletsintreatingdiabeticperipheralneuropathyarct AT yixuanzhang usingcornealconfocalmicroscopytocomparemecobalaminintramuscularinjectionsvsoraltabletsintreatingdiabeticperipheralneuropathyarct AT shuozhang usingcornealconfocalmicroscopytocomparemecobalaminintramuscularinjectionsvsoraltabletsintreatingdiabeticperipheralneuropathyarct AT haikunwang usingcornealconfocalmicroscopytocomparemecobalaminintramuscularinjectionsvsoraltabletsintreatingdiabeticperipheralneuropathyarct AT ziyuanliu usingcornealconfocalmicroscopytocomparemecobalaminintramuscularinjectionsvsoraltabletsintreatingdiabeticperipheralneuropathyarct AT hongliwang usingcornealconfocalmicroscopytocomparemecobalaminintramuscularinjectionsvsoraltabletsintreatingdiabeticperipheralneuropathyarct
_version_	1718384225090011136

Using corneal confocal microscopy to compare Mecobalamin intramuscular injections vs oral tablets in treating diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a RCT

Ejemplares similares