Evidence Hub

Effect of empagliflozin on brachial artery shear stress and endothelial function in subjects with type 2 diabetes: Results from an exploratory study

Irace C, Cutruzzolà A, Parise M, Fiorentino R, Frazzetto M, Gnasso C, Casciaro F, Gnasso A

Diabetes & vascular disease research, 2020

35 participants · 24 citations

Abstract

Empagliflozin reduces the risk of cardiovascular mortality in subjects with type 2 diabetes. We demonstrated that empagliflozin increases blood viscosity and carotid shear stress and decreases carotid wall thickness. Shear stress is the force acting on the endothelial surface and modulates arterial function. The current study evaluates the influence of empagliflozin on brachial artery shear stress and endothelial function compared to incretin-based therapy. The study is a nonrandomized, open, prospective cohort study including 35 subjects with type 2 diabetes administered empagliflozin or incretin-based therapy. Shear stress was calculated with a validated formula, and endothelial function was evaluated using the flow-mediated dilation technique. Both treatments resulted in comparable reductions in blood glucose and glycated haemoglobin. Brachial artery shear stress significantly increased exclusively in the empagliflozin group (61 ± 20 vs 68 ± 25 dynes/cm2, p = 0.04), whereas no significant difference was detected in the incretin-based therapy group (60 ± 20 vs 55 ± 12 dynes/cm2, p = not significant). Flow-mediated dilation significantly increased in the empagliflozin group (4.8 ± 4.5% vs 8.5 ± 5.6%, p = 0.03). Again, no change was detected in the incretin-based therapy group (5.1 ± 4.5% vs 4.7 ± 4.7%, p = not significant). The present findings demonstrate the beneficial effect of empagliflozin on shear stress and endothelial function in subjects with type 2 diabetes…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 35 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free