Cargando…

Urinary bladder wall thickness in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients

INTRODUCTION: Diabetes mellitus is an increasing health challenge with accompanying urological complications. Over 50% of men and women with diabetes have bladder dysfunction. According to the current understanding of bladder dysfunction, it refers to a progressive condition encompassing a broad spe...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Adegbehingbe, Olugbenga Olumide, Ayoola, Oluwagbemiga, Soyoye, David, Adegbehingbe, Anthonia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medical Communications Sp. z o.o. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9009343/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35449696
http://dx.doi.org/10.15557/JoU.2022.0003
_version_ 1784687248231366656
author Adegbehingbe, Olugbenga Olumide
Ayoola, Oluwagbemiga
Soyoye, David
Adegbehingbe, Anthonia
author_facet Adegbehingbe, Olugbenga Olumide
Ayoola, Oluwagbemiga
Soyoye, David
Adegbehingbe, Anthonia
author_sort Adegbehingbe, Olugbenga Olumide
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Diabetes mellitus is an increasing health challenge with accompanying urological complications. Over 50% of men and women with diabetes have bladder dysfunction. According to the current understanding of bladder dysfunction, it refers to a progressive condition encompassing a broad spectrum of lower urinary tract symptoms including urinary urgency, frequency, nocturia, and incontinence. Urinary bladder dysfunction has been classically described as diminished bladder sensation, poor contractility, and increased post-void residual urine, termed bladder cystopathy. Ultrasonography of the urinary bladder, which is a cheap, safe, radiation free, non-invasive and reliable imaging modality, may help to identify diabetes mellitus patients prone to develop urinary bladder dysfunction. METHOD: The study population comprised 80 diabetic subjects recruited from the diabetic outpatient clinic and another 80 age- and sex-matched asymptomatic control subjects. Ultrasound scan of their urinary bladder wall was performed using a curvilinear transducer to determine the thickness and other sonographic features. RESULTS: Out of the 80 diabetic subjects, 30 (37.5%) were males, while 50 (62.5%) were females; of 80 non-diabetic control subjects, 40 (50%) were males and 40 (50%) were females. The mean age of the diabetic subjects was 59.5 ± 10.4 years with a range of 40–82 years, while that of the controls was 60.2 ± 7.4 years with a range of 40–85 years. There was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.637) between the mean age of the diabetic and control subjects. The mean urinary bladder wall thickness in the diabetics was greater than in the non-diabetics in the study subjects. There was a statistically significant difference between the urinary bladder thickness of diabetic subjects and the control group (p <0.001). The mean urinary bladder wall thickness of the male and female subjects included in this study was 2.84 ± 1.31 mm and 2.9 ± 1.37 mm, respectively, with no statistically significant difference between them (p = 0.159). It was statistically significant between diabetic men and women (p = 0.027). Using Spearman’s rank correlation to test the relationship between the glycaemic haemoglobin level of diabetic subjects and urinary bladder wall thickness, it was revealed that there was no correlation between these variables (Spearman’s rho = 0.119, p = 0.309). The relationship between the urinary bladder volume of diabetic subjects and their mean urinary bladder wall thickness showed no correlation either (Spearman’s rho = –0.009, p = 0.937). Only gender was a statistically significant predictor of urinary bladder wall thickness among other variables. CONCLUSION: Mean bladder wall thickness in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus was greater than in the control subjects, and also greater in diabetic men compared to diabetic women, but the difference did not attain statistical significance. Urinary bladder wall thickness of the diabetics did not correlate with their glycaemic haemoglobin levels. Only gender was found to be a predictor of bladder wall thickness.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9009343
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Medical Communications Sp. z o.o.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90093432022-04-20 Urinary bladder wall thickness in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients Adegbehingbe, Olugbenga Olumide Ayoola, Oluwagbemiga Soyoye, David Adegbehingbe, Anthonia J Ultrason Research Paper INTRODUCTION: Diabetes mellitus is an increasing health challenge with accompanying urological complications. Over 50% of men and women with diabetes have bladder dysfunction. According to the current understanding of bladder dysfunction, it refers to a progressive condition encompassing a broad spectrum of lower urinary tract symptoms including urinary urgency, frequency, nocturia, and incontinence. Urinary bladder dysfunction has been classically described as diminished bladder sensation, poor contractility, and increased post-void residual urine, termed bladder cystopathy. Ultrasonography of the urinary bladder, which is a cheap, safe, radiation free, non-invasive and reliable imaging modality, may help to identify diabetes mellitus patients prone to develop urinary bladder dysfunction. METHOD: The study population comprised 80 diabetic subjects recruited from the diabetic outpatient clinic and another 80 age- and sex-matched asymptomatic control subjects. Ultrasound scan of their urinary bladder wall was performed using a curvilinear transducer to determine the thickness and other sonographic features. RESULTS: Out of the 80 diabetic subjects, 30 (37.5%) were males, while 50 (62.5%) were females; of 80 non-diabetic control subjects, 40 (50%) were males and 40 (50%) were females. The mean age of the diabetic subjects was 59.5 ± 10.4 years with a range of 40–82 years, while that of the controls was 60.2 ± 7.4 years with a range of 40–85 years. There was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.637) between the mean age of the diabetic and control subjects. The mean urinary bladder wall thickness in the diabetics was greater than in the non-diabetics in the study subjects. There was a statistically significant difference between the urinary bladder thickness of diabetic subjects and the control group (p <0.001). The mean urinary bladder wall thickness of the male and female subjects included in this study was 2.84 ± 1.31 mm and 2.9 ± 1.37 mm, respectively, with no statistically significant difference between them (p = 0.159). It was statistically significant between diabetic men and women (p = 0.027). Using Spearman’s rank correlation to test the relationship between the glycaemic haemoglobin level of diabetic subjects and urinary bladder wall thickness, it was revealed that there was no correlation between these variables (Spearman’s rho = 0.119, p = 0.309). The relationship between the urinary bladder volume of diabetic subjects and their mean urinary bladder wall thickness showed no correlation either (Spearman’s rho = –0.009, p = 0.937). Only gender was a statistically significant predictor of urinary bladder wall thickness among other variables. CONCLUSION: Mean bladder wall thickness in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus was greater than in the control subjects, and also greater in diabetic men compared to diabetic women, but the difference did not attain statistical significance. Urinary bladder wall thickness of the diabetics did not correlate with their glycaemic haemoglobin levels. Only gender was found to be a predictor of bladder wall thickness. Medical Communications Sp. z o.o. 2022-02-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9009343/ /pubmed/35449696 http://dx.doi.org/10.15557/JoU.2022.0003 Text en 2022 Polish Ultrasound Society. Published by Medical Communications Sp. z o.o. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (CC BY-NC-ND). Reproduction is permitted for personal, educational, non-commercial use, provided that the original article is in whole, unmodified, and properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Paper
Adegbehingbe, Olugbenga Olumide
Ayoola, Oluwagbemiga
Soyoye, David
Adegbehingbe, Anthonia
Urinary bladder wall thickness in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients
title Urinary bladder wall thickness in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients
title_full Urinary bladder wall thickness in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients
title_fullStr Urinary bladder wall thickness in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients
title_full_unstemmed Urinary bladder wall thickness in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients
title_short Urinary bladder wall thickness in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients
title_sort urinary bladder wall thickness in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9009343/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35449696
http://dx.doi.org/10.15557/JoU.2022.0003
work_keys_str_mv AT adegbehingbeolugbengaolumide urinarybladderwallthicknessintype2diabetesmellituspatients
AT ayoolaoluwagbemiga urinarybladderwallthicknessintype2diabetesmellituspatients
AT soyoyedavid urinarybladderwallthicknessintype2diabetesmellituspatients
AT adegbehingbeanthonia urinarybladderwallthicknessintype2diabetesmellituspatients