Increased Risk of Falls, Fall-related Injuries and Fractures in People with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes - A Nationwide Cohort Study

Bone Fragility in Diabetes and its Management: A Narrative Review

Bone fragility is a serious yet under-recognised complication of diabetes mellitus (DM) that is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Multiple complex pathophysiological mechanisms mediating bone fragility amongst DM patients have been proposed and identified. Fracture risk in both type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) continues to be understated and underestimated by conventional risk assessment tools, posing an additional challenge to the identification of at-risk patients who may benefit from earlier intervention or preventive strategies. Over the years, an increasing body of evidence has demonstrated the efficacy of osteo-pharmacological agents in managing skeletal fragility in DM. This review seeks to elaborate on the risk of bone fragility in DM, the underlying pathogenesis and skeletal alterations, the approach to fracture risk assessment in DM, management strategies and therapeutic options.

Neurological and metabolic related pathophysiologies and treatment of comorbid diabetes with depression

BACKGROUND

The comorbidity between diabetes mellitus and depression was revealed, and diabetes mellitus increased the prevalence of depressive disorder, which ranked 13th in the leading causes of disability-adjusted life-years. Insulin resistance, which is common in diabetes mellitus, has increased the risk of depressive symptoms in both humans and animals. However, the mechanisms behind the comorbidity are multi-factorial and complicated. There is still no causal chain to explain the comorbidity exactly. Moreover, Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, insulin and metformin, which are recommended for treating diabetes mellitus-induced depression, were found to be a risk factor in some complications of diabetes.

AIMS

Given these problems, many researchers made remarkable efforts to analyze diabetes complicating depression from different aspects, including insulin resistance, stress and Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal axis, neurological system, oxidative stress, and inflammation. Drug therapy, such as Hydrogen Sulfide, Cannabidiol, Ascorbic Acid and Hesperidin, are conducive to alleviating diabetes mellitus and depression. Here, we reviewed the exact pathophysiology underlying the comorbidity between depressive disorder and diabetes mellitus and drug therapy.

METHODS

The review refers to the available literature in PubMed and Web of Science, searching critical terms related to diabetes mellitus, depression and drug therapy.

RESULTS

In this review, we found that brain structure and function, neurogenesis, brain-derived neurotrophic factor and glucose and lipid metabolism were involved in the pathophysiology of the comorbidity. Obesity might lead to diabetes mellitus and depression through reduced adiponectin and increased leptin and resistin. In addition, drug therapy displayed in this review could expand the region of potential therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The review summarizes the mechanisms underlying the comorbidity. It also overviews drug therapy with anti-diabetic and anti-depressant effects.

Sex- and Age Group-Specific Fracture Incidence Rates Trends for Type 1 and 2 Diabetes Mellitus

The incidence of major osteoporotic fractures has declined in men and women in Western countries over the last two decades. Although fracture risk is higher in persons with diabetes mellitus, trends of fractures remain unknown in men and women with diabetes. We investigated the trends in fracture incidence rates (IRs) in men and women with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) in Denmark between 1997 and 2017. We identified men and women aged 18+ years who sustained a fracture (excluding skull and facial fractures) between 1997 and 2017 using the Danish National Patient Registry. We calculated sex-specific IRs of fractures per 10,000 person-years separately in persons with T1D, T2D, or without diabetes. Furthermore, we compared median IRs of the first 5 years (1997-2002) to the median IRs of the last 5 years (2012-2017). We identified 1,235,628 persons with fractures including 4863 (43.6% women) with T1D, 65,366 (57.5% women) with T2D, and 1,165,399 (54.1% women) without diabetes. The median IRs of fractures declined 20.2%, 19.9%, and 7.8% in men with T1D, T2D, and without diabetes, respectively (p-trend <0.05). The median IRs decreased 6.4% in women with T1D (p-trend = 0.35) and 25.6% in women with T2D (p-trend <0.05) but increased 2.3% in women without diabetes (p-trend = 0.08). Fracture IRs decreased in men with both diabetes types and only in women with T2D, highlighting the need for further attention behind the stable trend observed in women with T1D. © 2023 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Perceptions of fracture and fall risk and of the benefits and barriers to exercise in adults with diabetes

The increased risk of fractures and falls is under-appreciated by adults living with diabetes and by their healthcare providers. Strategies to overcome perceived exercise barriers and exercise programs optimized for bone health should be implemented.

PURPOSE

The purpose of the study was to assess the perceptions of fracture and fall risk, and the perceived benefits of and barriers to exercise in adults ≥ 50 years old living with type 1 (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

Participants were recruited through social media and from medical clinics and invited to complete a self-administered online survey, comprising 38 close-ended questions and 4 open-ended questions.

RESULTS

A total of 446 participants completed the survey: 38% T1D, 59% T2D, and 3% with unreported diabetes type. Most participants did not believe that having diabetes increased their risk of fractures (81%) nor falls (68%), and more than 90% reported having not been informed about diabetes-related fracture risk by their physicians. Among exercise types, participation in moderate aerobic exercise was most common (54%), while only 31%, 32%, and 37% of participants engaged in strenuous aerobic, resistance, and balance/flexibility exercise, respectively. The most prevalent barrier to exercise for both T1D and T2D was a lack of motivation, reported by 54% of participants. Lack of time and fear of hypoglycemia were common exercise barriers reported by participants with T1D. Most participants owned a smart phone (69%), tablet (60%), or computer (56%), and 46% expressed an interest in partaking in virtually delivered exercise programs.

CONCLUSIONS

Adults living with diabetes have limited awareness of increased fall and fracture risk. These risks are insufficiently highlighted by health care providers; strategies to overcome perceived exercise barriers and exercise programs optimized for bone health should be implemented.

Advanced glycation end products and bone - How do we measure them and how do they correlate with bone mineral density and fractures? A systematic review and evaluation of precision of measures

The role of advanced glycation end products (AGEs) in bone fragility especially in diabetic bone disease is increasingly recognized and researched. As skeletal frailty in diabetes does not correlate to bone mineral density (BMD) in the same way as in postmenopausal osteoporosis, BMD may not be a suitable measure of bone quality in persons with diabetes. Abundant research exists upon the effect of AGEs on bone, and though full understanding of the mechanisms of actions does not yet exist, there is little doubt of the clinical relevance. Thus, the measurement of AGEs as well as possible treatment effects on AGEs have become issues of interest. The aim of this report is to summarize results of measurements of AGEs. It consists of a systematic review of the existing literature on AGE measurements in clinical research, an evaluation of the precision of skin autofluorescence (SAF) measurement by AGE Reader® (Diagnoptics), and a short commentary on treatment of osteoporosis in patients with and without diabetes with respects to AGEs. We conclude that various AGE measures correlate well, both fluorescent and non-fluorescent and in different tissues, and that more than one target of measure may be used. However, pentosidine has shown good correlation with both bone measures and fracture risk in existing literature and results on SAF as a surrogate measurement is promising as some corresponding associations with fracture risk and bone measures are reported. As SAF measurements performed with the AGE Reader® display high precision and allow for a totally noninvasive procedure, conducting AGE measurements using this method has great potential and further research of its applicability is encouraged.

Drug-induced fall risk in older patients: A pharmacovigilance study of FDA adverse event reporting system database

Objectives: As fall events and injuries have become a growing public health problem in older patients and the causes of falls are complex, there is an emerging need to identify the risk of drug-induced falls. Methods: To mine and analyze the risk signals of drug-induced falls in older patients to provide evidence for drug safety. The FDA Adverse Event Reporting System was used to collect drug-induced fall events among older patients. Disproportionality analyses of odds ratio (ROR) and proportional reported ratio were performed to detect the adverse effects signal. Results: A total of 208,849 reports (34,840 fall events and 1,898 drugs) were considered. The average age of the included patients was 76.95 ± 7.60 years, and there were more females (64.47%) than males. A total of 258 drugs with positive signals were detected to be associated with drug-induced fall incidence in older patients. The neurological drugs (104, 44.1%) with the largest number of positive detected signals mainly included antipsychotics, antidepressants, antiparkinsonian drugs, central nervous system drugs, anticonvulsants and hypnotic sedatives. Other systems mainly included the circulatory system (25, 10.6%), digestive system (15, 6.4%), and motor system (12, 5.1%). Conclusion: Many drugs were associated with a high risk of falls in older patients. The drug is one of the critical and preventable factors for fall control, and the risk level of drug-induced falls should be considered to optimize drug therapy in clinical practice.

The pattern of incident fractures according to fracture site in people with T1D

Higher incidences of fractures are seen in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D), but knowledge on different fracture sites is sparse. We found a higher incidence mainly for distal fracture sites in people with T1D compared to controls. It must be further studied which fractures attributed to the higher incidence rates (IRs) at specific sites.

INTRODUCTION

People with T1D have a higher incidence of fractures compared to the general population. However, sparse knowledge exists on the incidence rates of individual fracture sites. Therefore, we examined the incidence of various fracture sites in people with newly treated T1D compared to matched controls.

METHODS

All people from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD (1987-2017), of all ages with a T1D diagnosis code (n = 6381), were included. People with T1D were matched by year of birth, sex, and practice to controls (n = 6381). Fracture IRs and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were calculated. Analyses were stratified by fracture site and sex.

RESULTS

The IR of all fractures was significantly higher in people with T1D compared to controls (IRR: 1.39 (CI95%: 1.24-1.55)). Compared to controls, the IRR for people with T1D was higher for several fracture sites including carpal (IRR: 1.41 (CI95%: 1.14-1.75)), clavicle (IRR: 2.10 (CI95%: 1.18-3.74)), foot (IRR: 1.70 (CI95%: 1.23-2.36)), humerus (IRR: 1.46 (CI95%: 1.04-2.05)), and tibia/fibula (IRR: 1.67 CI95%: 1.08-2.59)). In women with T1D, higher IRs were seen at the ankle (IRR: 2.25 (CI95%: 1.10-4.56)) and foot (IRR: 2.11 (CI95%: 1.27-3.50)), whereas in men with T1D, higher IRs were seen for carpal (IRR: 1.45 (CI95%: 1.14-1.86)), clavicle (IRR: 2.13 (CI95%: 1.13-4.02)), and humerus (IRR: 1.77 (CI95%: 1.10-2.83)) fractures.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of carpal, clavicle, foot, humerus, and tibia/fibula fractures was higher in newly treated T1D, but there was no difference at other fracture sites compared to controls. Therefore, the higher incidence of fractures in newly treated people with T1D has been found mainly for distal fracture sites.

Fracture Patterns in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Narrative Review of Recent Literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this narrative review, we have summarized the literature on fracture risk in T1DM and T2DM with a special focus on fracture site, time patterns, glucose-lowering drugs, and micro- and macrovascular complications.

RECENT FINDINGS

T1DM and T2DM were associated with an overall increased fracture risk, with preferent locations at the hip, vertebrae, humerus, and ankle in T1DM and at the hip, vertebrae, and likely humerus, distal forearm, and foot in T2DM. Fracture risk was higher with longer diabetes duration and the presence of micro- and macrovascular complications. In T2DM, fracture risk was higher with use of insulin, sulfonylurea, and thiazolidinediones and lower with metformin use. The increased fracture risk in T1DM and T2DM concerns specific fracture sites, and is higher in subjects with longer diabetes duration, vascular complications, and in T2DM with the use of specific glucose-lowering medication.