2000
DOI: 10.1097/00004872-200018010-00012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Insulin levels during fasting and the glucose tolerance test and Homaʼs index predict subsequent development of hypertension

Abstract: These results suggest that higher plasma IRI levels and/or insulin resistance are closely related to the pathogenesis of hypertension in patients with diabetes mellitus. Homa's index, fasting and sigmaIRI may be useful predictors of the subsequent development of hypertension.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

2
38
1
3

Year Published

2001
2001
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
2
38
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…27 Indeed, previous data suggest that individuals with both hypertension and type II diabetes have higher IR than normotensive type II diabetic patients. 28,29 Our main finding was that HOMA-IR, 1/HOMA-IR and QUICKI indices were strongly and significantly correlated with all the indices derived from clamp technique in this population. These results further prove the validity of these measures to assess IS.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 67%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…27 Indeed, previous data suggest that individuals with both hypertension and type II diabetes have higher IR than normotensive type II diabetic patients. 28,29 Our main finding was that HOMA-IR, 1/HOMA-IR and QUICKI indices were strongly and significantly correlated with all the indices derived from clamp technique in this population. These results further prove the validity of these measures to assess IS.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…7,8 Patients with both hypertension and type II diabetes are more insulin-resistant that those with only type II diabetes. 28,29 K Several studies in a variety of populations have shown that indices like HOMA-IR or QUICKI are valid surrogate markers for insulin sensitivity. [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] K Data on the reliability of the above indices, 13,19,22 as well as their validity in hypertensive populations 11,13,19,22 are very limited.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, the mean systolic blood pressure was in the upper range of normal, and the mean diastolic blood pressure was in the borderline hypertensive range. The mean value of the HOMA index (Japan Diabetes Society, 2002), which is a marker of insulin resistance, was 43.0 and the proportion of subjects with HOMA index 42.5 was 71% in both groups, indicating that the majority of the subjects had insulin resistance (Kashiwabara et al, 2000;Japan Diabetes Society, 2002;Mclaughlin et al, 2003;McNeely et al, 2003). The reason for the significant change appeared only in hemoglobin A1c was probably the stability for this measure, representing the average levels of serum glucose during the past 90 days.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…25 It has been shown in previous studies that the insulinogenic index, which may reflect the early response of insulin secretion to glucose loading, declined as the glucose tolerance changed from normal to a diabetic pattern. 16,17 In normotensive acromegalic patients we observed a marginally significant higher insulinogenic index than in hypertensive acromegalics. This suggests that in hypertensive acromegalics glucose tolerance deteriorates from a normal to a diabetic pattern.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…The mean plasma fasting glucose and insulin, insulinogenic index (ratio of the increment of the insulin level to that of glucose level between 0 and 30 min after the OGTT) and ⌺IRI (the sum of the plasma insulin levels 0, 30, 60 and 120 min after the OGTT) of both groups were compared. In addition, the homeostasis model insulin resistance index (Homa's index) 15 a candidate for the simple assessment of insulin sensitivity, 16,17 was calculated using the formula: fasting plasma glucose (mg/dl) × fasting insulinaemia ( U/ml) Ϭ 405, and the mean indices of the groups were compared.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%