Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Early View
  • Archive
  • Authors/reviewers
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • COVID-19 submission information
    • Institutional open access agreements
    • Peer reviewer login
  • Alerts
  • Subscriptions

Pulmonary function tests in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis

Jesús Díez-Manglano, Uxua Asìn Samper
ERJ Open Research 2021 7: 00371-2020; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00371-2020
Jesús Díez-Manglano
1Dept of Internal Medicine, Hospital Royo Villanova, Zaragoza, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jesús Díez-Manglano
  • For correspondence: jdiez@aragon.es
Uxua Asìn Samper
2Dept of Internal Medicine, University Hospital Miguel Servet, Zaragoza, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Objectives The aim of this study was to determine the association between type 2 diabetes (T2D) and pulmonary function tests.

Methods After conducting an exhaustive literature search, we performed a meta-analysis. We employed the inverse variance method with a random-effects model to calculate the effect estimate as the mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We calculated the heterogeneity with the I2 statistic and performed a meta-regression analysis by sex, body mass index (BMI), smoking and geographical region. We also conducted a sensitivity analysis according to the studies’ publication date, size of the T2D group and the study quality, excluding the study with the greatest weight in the effect.

Results The meta-analysis included 66 studies (one longitudinal, two case–control and 63 cross-sectional), with 11 134 patients with T2D and 48 377 control participants. The pooled MD (95% CI) for the predicted percentage of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory flow at 25–75% of FVC, peak expiratory flow, and diffusing capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide were −7.15 (95% CI −8.27, −6.03; p<0.001), −9.21 (95% CI −11.15, −7.26; p<0.001), −9.89 (95% CI −14.42, −5.36; p<0.001), −9.79 (95% CI −13.42, −6.15; p<0.001) and −7.13 (95% CI −10.62, −3.64; p<0.001), respectively. There was no difference in the ratio of FEV1/FVC (95% CI −0.27; −1.63, 1.08; p=0.69). In all cases, there was considerable heterogeneity. The meta-regression analysis showed that between studies heterogeneity was not explained by patient sex, BMI, smoking or geographical region. The findings were consistent in the sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions T2D is associated with impaired pulmonary function, independently of sex, smoking, BMI and geographical region. Longitudinal studies are needed to investigate outcomes for patients with T2D and impaired pulmonary function.

Abstract

T2D is associated with impaired pulmonary function independently of tobacco use. We need to investigate outcomes for T2D patients with impaired pulmonary function. A screening strategy incorporating PFTs must be implemented in T2D patients. https://bit.ly/3iPJy1M

Introduction

Diabetes is a chronic disease that affects 463 million people worldwide over the age of 20 years and is expected to affect more than 570 million by 2030 [1]. Diabetes is a leading cause of cardiovascular disease, blindness, kidney failure and lower limb amputation [2]. It is estimated that 4.2 million deaths worldwide were due to type 2 diabetes (T2D) and its complications in 2019 [1].

T2D affects all organs in the human body. It usually develops relatively slowly, and it is frequent the existence of target organ damage when T2D is diagnosed. A number of studies have shown fibrotic changes in the lungs [3] and pulmonary microcirculation disorders in patients with diabetes [4]. There have been persistent attempts investigating abnormal respiratory conditions in general diabetic patients [5–6]. However, pulmonary function impairment has not been well studied in patients with T2D. Although interest in this condition has increased in recent years, the findings of studies reflect high variability. A 2010 meta-analysis by van den Borst et al. [7] showed an association between T2D and a restrictive pattern. Recently, Saini et al. [8] have conducted a new systematic review including exclusively English language studies published in PubMed between 2010 and 2018. Both meta-analyses reported data about forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC) and FEV1/FVC ratio, and van den Borst et al. [7] also presented data about diffusing capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide (DLCO).

We hypothesise that the lung may be a target organ of T2D. To contribute to advance the knowledge in this field, we decided to perform a new meta-analysis including literature published in all languages and analysing the influence of publication date, study quality and number of individuals included. Furthermore, as novelty, we determined the influence of sex, tobacco use, geographical area and body mass index (BMI). The aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate the abnormal pulmonary function test results for patients with T2D incorporating the most recent studies. In addition to the parameters reported in the two previous systematic reviews, we included forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of total lung capacity (FEF25–75%) and peak expiratory flow (PEF).

Methods

We designed this meta-analysis to determine the influence of T2D on the following parameters of pulmonary function tests: FEV1, FVC, FEV1/FVC ratio, FEF25–75%, PEF and DLCO.

The protocol for this meta-analysis was recorded in the PROSPERO registry (number CRD42020145456) and was conducted according to the guidelines of the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group.

Data sources and search strategy

We performed a systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library and Virtual Health Library databases from their inception to August 1, 2019. The search strategy was “(pulmonary function test OR FEV1 OR FVC OR DLCO OR PEF OR FEF25–75) AND diabetes”. We performed an additional search in Google and ResearchGate. The reference lists of the selected studies were screened manually to find more studies.

Study selection

To be included in this review, the studies had to meet the following inclusion criteria:

  • 1) Presence of a T2D group and a control group without diabetes.

  • 2) Provide values either of FEV1, FVC, PEF, FEF25–75%, DLCO and/or FEV1/FVC ratio for both patient groups.

The exclusion criteria were studies on cystic-fibrosis-related diabetes, type 1 diabetes, studies that did not differentiate between type 1 and T2D, studies that included patients with respiratory diseases as asthma or COPD, studies that did not report data on mean and sd, studies published in predatory journals, conference abstracts, theses and articles published in Chinese language. We considered predatory all journals that appeared in the List of Predatory Journals (https://predatoryjournals.com/journals/). When two studies referred to the same population, in the same period and showed overlapping data, we selected the most recent study for inclusion.

We independently screened the articles by reviewing the titles and abstracts. We recovered the studies that met the inclusion criteria and those with abstracts that lacked crucial information to evaluate the full text. Any discrepancy was resolved by consensus.

When a study's full text was not accessible online or supplemental data were required, we made an attempt to contact the authors by e-mail; unfortunately, these attempts were not successful.

Quality assessment

We independently assessed the risk of bias of all the studies included using the Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies (National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute at the National Institutes of Health, USA), available from https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools. The tool includes 14 items about objective, population, rate of eligible persons, sample size, exposure, outcomes, blinded assessors, follow-up and confounding variables. The two authors classified the studies as good, fair or poor. Any discrepancy was resolved by consensus. We considered a study as poor when T2D patients and controls were not selected from the same population or in a different time or place, and fair when we cannot determine this and there were doubts about a selection bias. All studies were included in the meta-analysis; however, we conducted a sensitivity study only on those studies of good quality.

Data extraction

From each included study, we extracted the following information: first author, year of publication, country, sample size, patient age, sex, BMI, tobacco use, T2D duration, fasting blood glucose, glycated haemoglobin and microangiopathy. The extracted results were FEV1 (L), percentage of predicted (%) FEV1, FVC (L), % FVC, FEV1/FVC ratio (%), FEF25–75% (L·s−1), % FEF25–75%, PEF (L·s−1), % PEF, DLCO (mL·min−1·mmHg−1) and % DLCO. Whenever the T2D or control group was divided into subgroups, a pooled mean and sd for these combined subgroups was calculated.

Data synthesis and statistical analysis

We performed the statistical analysis using Review Manager version 5.3 (Cochrane Collaboration, Baltimore, MD, USA). The results are expressed as mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Throughout the analysis, we applied the inverse variance method with a random-effects model. To assess the heterogeneity and inconsistency between the studies, we employed the tau squared and I2 statistics. Data with p≥0.10 and I2≤50% were defined as low heterogeneity. We evaluated the publication bias with a funnel plot. We planned a meta-regression analysis by subgroup according to sex, geographical area, tobacco use and BMI. We performed a sensitivity analysis by applying a fixed-effects model and calculating the effect estimates according to publication date, size of T2D group and study quality and by eliminating the study with the greatest weight on the effect. We established three categories of publication year, before 2000, 2000–2009 and 2010–2019, and two categories of T2D group size, <50 and ≥50 patients. For the sensitivity analysis according study quality, we calculated the effect estimates in two ways: including only the good quality studies; and including all studies adding predatory journals and grey literature.

Results

Study selection

We identified 17 662 records. Figure 1 shows the study selection flowchart. Our initial search strategy produced 17 549 articles. With the manual search of the reference lists and the additional search in Google and ResearchGate, we added 115 articles. After eliminating the duplicated and irrelevant articles, we were left with 263 articles. We excluded 191 articles for the following reasons: 62 had no control group, 49 included patients with types 1 and 2 diabetes without differentiating them, 30 provided insufficient numerical data to be included in the meta-analysis, 26 originated from predatory journals, 10 presented overlapping data, six came from grey literature (theses and proceedings), four were in Chinese language, one included patients with respiratory diseases, two were meta-analyses and one was an editorial. There was no interrater agreement in study selection and consensus was necessary for eight studies. Furthermore, the full text of six papers was not found (supplementary material). Ultimately, we included 66 studies in the meta-analysis [9–74], one longitudinal, two case–control and 63 cross-sectional ones. From the longitudinal study, we extracted only the baseline pulmonary function test data.

FIGURE 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 1

Flowchart of included studies.

Study characteristics

Table 1 lists the characteristics of the included studies, which were published between 1991 and 2018. Three studies were conducted in Africa, 11 in America, 33 in Asia, 18 in Europe and one in Oceania. Fifty-eight studies were written in English, 4 in Turkish, 2 in Spanish, one in German and one in Japanese. After the quality assessment, we classified 54 studies as good, six as fair and six as poor. The interrater agreement was full. A total of 59 511 participants were included, 11 134 in the T2D group and 48 377 in the control group. The age range of T2D patients was 39.8–79 years, and 35.1% were women.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Characteristics of the included studies and patients with type 2 diabetes

Pulmonary function tests

We provide here data on predicted percentages of pulmonary function tests. Data about absolute values are reported in supplementary material.

FEV1

A total of 41 studies included data on % FEV1, and 34 included data on FEV1 (L). Figure 2a and figure S1 (supplementary material) show the comparison forest plot. The pooled effect estimates for the patients with T2D were −7.15 (95% CI −8.27 to −6.03; p<0.0001) for % FEV1 and −0.34 (95% CI −0.42 to −0.27; p<0.0001) for FEV1 (L).

FIGURE 2
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 2

Forest plots of (a) % predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s and (b) % predicted forced vital capacity.

FVC

A total of 35 studies included data on % FVC, and 23 included data on FVC (L). Figure 2b and figure S2 (supplementary material) show the effect estimates. The pooled estimates for the patients with T2D were −9.21 (95% CI −11.15 to −7.26; p<0.0001) for % FVC and −0.36 (95% CI −0.43 to −0.29; p<0.0001) for FVC (L).

FEV1/FVC ratio

A total of 45 studies included data on the FEV1/FVC ratio (%). Figure 3 shows the comparison forest plot. The pooled effect estimate for the patients with T2D was −0.27 (95% CI −1.63 to 1.08; p<0.69).

FIGURE 3
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 3

Forest plot of forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity ratio (%).

FEF25–75%

A total of 13 studies included data on % FEF25–75%, and 12 included data on FEF25–75% (L·s−1). Figure 4a and figure S3 (supplementary material) show the forest plots of the effect estimates. For the patients with T2D, the pooled estimates for % FEF25–75% and FEF25–75% (L·s−1) were −9.89 (95% CI −14.42 to −5.36; p<0.0001) and −0.48 (95% CI −0.71 to −0.24; p<0.0001), respectively.

FIGURE 4
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 4

Forest plots of (a) % predicted forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of total lung capacity, (b) % predicted peak expiratory flow, and (c) % predicted diffusion capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide.

PEF

A total of 15 studies included data on % PEF, and 19 included data on PEF (L·s−1). Figure 4b and figure S4 (supplementary material) show the comparison forest plot. The pooled effect estimates for the patients with T2D were −9.79 (95% CI −13.42 to −6.15; p<0.0001) for %PEF and −1.07 (95% CI −1.43 to −0.71; p<0.0001) for PEF (L·s−1).

DLCO

A total of 12 studies included data on %DLCO, and ten included data on DLCO (mL·min−1·mmHg−1). Figure 4c and figure S5 (supplementary material) show the comparison forest plot. The pooled effect estimates for the patients with T2D were −7.13 (95% CI −10.62 to −3.64; p<0.0001) for % DLCO and −3.42 (95% CI −5.14 to −1.70; p<0.0001) for DLCO (mL·min−1·mmHg−1).

There was significant heterogeneity for all parameters of the pulmonary function tests (I2, 80–100%).

Subgroup analysis

Table 2 and table S1 (supplementary material) present the meta-regression analysis pre-specified by subgroup.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 2

Meta-regression with subgroup analysis

Sex

Fifteen studies reported data differentiated by sex. A comparison could be established for % FEV1, FEV1 (L), % FVC, FVC (L), FEV1/FVC ratio and PEF (L·s−1). There were no differences by sex (p>0.25 for all cases).

Tobacco use

Fourteen studies included patients who smoked and those who did not, and 43 studies included exclusively nonsmokers. Another nine studies did not report data on tobacco use. There was heterogeneity between the groups; the effect estimate for the patients with T2D who did not smoke presented a reduction in % FEV1, % FVC, FVC (L) (p≤0.01 for all) and PEF (L·s−1) (p<0.001), which was higher than in the other studies that included smokers and nonsmokers.

Geographical region

The same abnormal pulmonary function test results were observed in the patients with T2D in all continents. However, we observed heterogeneity between the various continents in % FEV1, % FVC, FEV1/FVC ratio, FEF25–75% (L·s−1), % PEF, DLCO (mL·min−1·mmHg−1) (all p<0.001) and PEF (L·s−1) (p=0.004).

Sensitivity analysis

When we applied the fixed-effects model, we observed the same abnormal pulmonary function test results. The same result occurred when we performed an analysis separated by publication year, size of the T2D group, study quality and even when we included the articles from predatory journals and from the proceedings of congresses (table 3 and table S2 supplementary material). The magnitude of the effect estimates was higher for % FEV1, % FVC, % FEF25–75%, % PEF and % DLCO when only good quality studies were included in the meta-analysis. The removal of the study with greatest weight in each pulmonary function test did not change the results.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 3

Sensitivity analysis

Publication bias

The funnel plots showed asymmetry, indicating the presence of potential publication biases (figure 5 and figure S6 supplementary material).

FIGURE 5
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 5

Funnel plots of (a) % predicted forced expiratory volume in 1 s and (b) % predicted forced vital capacity, (c) forced expiratory volume in 1 s/forced vital capacity ratio (%), (d) forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of total lung capacity, (e) % predicted peak expiratory flow, and (f) % predicted diffusion capacity of the lungs for carbon monoxide.

Discussion

The results of our meta-analysis show that all of the pulmonary function test results, except the FEV1/FVC ratio, were decreased for the patients with T2D. This pulmonary function impairment in T2D is observed worldwide, also in nonsmokers and is independent of sex.

Various qualitative reviews have been published on the influence of diabetes on pulmonary function [75–80], all of which have reported the presence of a reduction in FEV1 and FVC in patients with diabetes. In 2010, van den Borst et al. [7] published a meta-analysis on pulmonary function in patients with diabetes, which included 16 studies with 1695 patients with T2D and 10 260 controls. The pooled difference in the % FEV1, % FVC and % DLCO was −4.86, −6.67 and −9.30, respectively, with no difference in the FEV1/FVC ratio. Their results are consistent with those observed in our meta-analysis.

Recently, Saini et al. [8] reported another meta-analysis with 22 studies that included 7526 patients with T2D and 43 641 controls. The pooled difference in the % FEV1 and % FVC was −6.37 and −6.56 respectively, with no difference in the FEV1/FVC ratio. The meta-analysis also presented data on FEV1 (L), FVC (L), with differences of −0.27 and −0.31 L, respectively, which were consistent with those observed in our meta-analysis. However, our meta-analysis and that of Saini et al. [8] differ in the included studies. In our meta-analysis there are 20 studies that Saini et al. [8] did not include [38, 40, 43, 44, 47–50, 53, 57, 59–68]. Moreover, we did not include nine of the studies in the Saini et al. [8] meta-analysis because we considered that the studies did not clearly state that they only included patients with T2D [supplementary references S86-S88, S96, S98, S103, S104, S106, S108]. Unlike the studies by van den Borst et al. [7] and Saini et al. [8], our meta-analysis included data on PEF and FEF25–75%. The patients with T2D have a reduction of almost 10% in both of these tests, which indicates that there was impairment both in the large and small airways.

The functional impairment observed in patients with T2D for FEV1 and FVC seem modest but is approximately 300 mL. Much lower differences (100–150 mL) have been considered significant in clinical trials with bronchodilators in patients with COPD [81, 82]. Therefore, pulmonary function impairment in T2D is relevant, although prospective longitudinal studies are still necessary to elucidate the progression of patients with diabetes and pulmonary impairment. It is widely known that patients with T2D have more diseases and pulmonary infections, including pneumonia and tuberculosis [83, 84].

The prevalence of T2D varies according to geographical region and is higher in North America, Southeast Asia and the Middle East [1]. Age, sex, weight, height, body position and ethnicity are factors that affect pulmonary function [85]. We therefore proposed a pre-specified analysis of pulmonary function tests for patients with T2D from various continents. Patients with T2D from all geographical regions presented reduced FEV1, FVC, PEF, FEF25–75% and DLCO. We also found that impairment of T2D in the pulmonary function tests was observed in both sexes and did not change when we included only those studies with nonsmoker patients. In fact, the decrease of pulmonary function tests was higher in studies that included only nonsmokers than in the studies with a mixture of smokers and nonsmokers. We do not have an explanation for this finding, but we have observed that most of studies including smokers were conducted in Europe and America. It is possible that patients included in studies from Asia and Africa were nonsmokers but had more environmental exposure to biomass fuel, air pollution or other noxious particles or gases.

Overweight and obesity are associated with a detriment of lung function [86, 87]. Therefore, we could consider that BMI is a confounder. Interestingly, we have observed that the reduction in pulmonary function tests, specifically FEV1, FVC, FEF25–75% and DLCO, is present in normal, overweight and obese patients with T2D. FEV1 reflects the airway resistance, and FVC the total compliance from both the chest wall and the lungs. The fat accumulation on the chest wall and in abdomen substantially alters the movement of thoracic cage and diaphragm and impairs the lung compliance [88].

Including PEF and FEF25–75% is one of novel findings in this meta-analysis. The decrease of % PEF and % FEV1 in patients with T2D was −9.79% y −7.15% respectively. It is known that there is high correlation between both parameters. However, while FEV1 is a good indicator of peripheral and proximal airway resistance, PEF reflects the status of proximal airway and is more effort dependant. FEF25–75% is a function of the small airway obstruction. The structural changes of airway and the destruction of the lung parenchyma can modify FEF25–75%. Thus, other mechanisms and not only obesity or tobacco use, must be involved in the decrease of lung function in patients with T2D and normal or overweight.

There are structural abnormalities in the lungs of patients with diabetes that could help explain the abnormal pulmonary function test results. Studies on the lungs of obese diabetic rats have observed thickening of alveolar basal lamina [88]. Autopsies of human patients with diabetes have also observed thickening of the capillary and epithelial basement membrane [89, 90]. This thickening is due to inflammatory and fibrotic changes [91]. Fibrosis causes reduced pulmonary elasticity and can decrease lung volumes in T2D. The deterioration of alveolar integrity has also been shown through lung scans following radionuclide inhalation [92]. Alteration of the capillary microcirculation structure can impair pulmonary perfusion and change the ventilation/perfusion ratio [93], which would explain the reduction in DLCO in patients with T2D.

Various biochemical mechanisms have been proposed to explain the pulmonary damage observed in T2D [94]. Sustained hyperglycaemia causes reduced superoxide dismutase activity and increased oxidative stress. The oxidative stress increases nonenzymatic glycosylation, contributing to pulmonary fibrosis. Abnormalities in the polyol pathways have also been involved, as well as abnormalities in the protein kinase B and nuclear factor-κB signalling pathways and in transforming growth factor-β [91, 95].

Heterogeneity is an important finding in our meta-analysis. There are several possible reasons for this. Firstly, there are differences in participants of studies. The mean age of T2D patients ranged from 39.8 to 79 years, the T2D duration from 0.35 to 12.9 years, the mean glycated haemoglobin from 6.1 to 9.5% and 0–92% patients had microangiopathy. Even in each continent, there are differences among patients from various geographical regions, for example between Japanese and Iranian in Asia, or Canadian and Venezuelan in America, or German and Greek people in Europe. Secondly, it is possible a publication bias. Probably there are small studies with negative results that have not been published.

One of our study's strengths is the exhaustive literature comprehensive literature search that only excluded Chinese articles. Our additional search provided a large number of articles not collected in the main databases. However, there was a notably high number of articles published in predatory journals, which leads us to think that there are a significant number of studies on pulmonary function in patients with T2D that have not been published, probably due to their low methodological quality. We also performed a sensitivity analysis, observing that the abnormalities in the pulmonary function test results were maintained when we changed statistical analysis method, both with a fixed and a random-effects model. The results also did not change when we differentiated them by study publication date, by including only the good quality studies and even when we excluded the study with the greatest weight, all of which reinforces the results of the meta-analysis.

However, our study also has a number of limitations. Firstly, we resolved the discrepancies in study selection and quality assessment by consensus, and did not calculate the Cohen's κ. However, the level of interrater agreement was high in study selection and total in quality assessment. Secondly, we observed considerable heterogeneity between the studies, even between those performed in the same geographical region. Although the implementation of a pulmonary function test is standardised, we cannot rule out that the heterogeneity is due to differing methods for measuring the pulmonary parameters. Thirdly, of the 66 studies included in the meta-analysis, only half included 50 or more cases in the T2D group, which leads us to think that many more studies might have been conducted with small groups that have not been published. The funnel plots also seem to indicate this idea. However, the results were consistent when we included only the studies with more patients. Finally, only a small number of the studies provided data separated by sex. The results of the analysis by sex should therefore be taken with caution and should be validated in future studies with a large number of patients.

In conclusion, T2D is associated with pulmonary function impairment; however, further studies with large numbers of patients from all geographical areas are needed to corroborate these data and to provide insight into the still pending issues on pulmonary impairment in patients with T2D, specifically progression and possible therapies.

Supplementary material

Supplementary Material

Please note: supplementary material is not edited by the Editorial Office, and is uploaded as it has been supplied by the author.

Supplementary material 00371-2020.supplement

Footnotes

  • This article has supplementary material available from openres.ersjournals.com.

  • PROSPERO registry number CRD42020145456.

  • The study protocol is available in the PROSPERO registry. Immediately following publication, the data will made be available.

  • Author contributions: J. Díez-Manglano and U. Asìn Samper participated in study design, literature search, data collection, data analysis and data interpretation. J. Díez-Manglano drafted the manuscript, and U. Asìn Samper contributed and approved the final version of the manuscript. The corresponding author has full access to all the data in the study and has final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.

  • Conflict of interest: J. Díez-Manglano has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: U. Asìn Samper has nothing to disclose.

  • Received June 11, 2020.
  • Accepted September 30, 2020.
  • Copyright ©ERS 2021
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This article is open access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Licence 4.0.

References

  1. ↵
    International Diabetes Federation. IDF Diabetes Atlas. 9th Edn, 2019. www.diabetesatlas.org/en/resources/ Date last accessed: May 5, 2020.
  2. ↵
    Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. Health at a glance 2019. OECD indicators. www.oecd-ilibrary.org/social-issues-migration-health/health-at-a-glance-2019_4dd50c09-en Date last accessed: January 22, 2020.
  3. ↵
    1. Ban CR,
    2. Twigg SM
    . Fibrosis in diabetes complications: pathogenic mechanisms and circulating and urinary markers. Vasc Health Risk Manag 2008; 4: 575–596. doi:10.2147/VHRM.S1991
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Roberts TJ,
    2. Burns AT,
    3. MacIsaac RJ, et al.
    Diagnosis and significance of pulmonary microvascular disease in diabetes. Diabetes Care 2018; 41: 854–861. doi:10.2337/dc17-1904
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Lange P,
    2. Parner J,
    3. Schnohr P, et al.
    Copenhagen City Heart Study: longitudinal analysis of ventilator capacity in diabetic and nondiabetic adults. Eur Respir J 2002; 20: 1406–1412. doi:10.1183/09031936.02.00050502
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Kuziemski K,
    2. Slominski W,
    3. Jassem E
    . Impact of diabetes mellitus on functional exercise capacity and pulmonary functions in patients with diabetes and healthy persons. BMC Endocr Disord 2019; 19: 2.
    OpenUrl
  7. ↵
    1. Van den Borst B,
    2. Gosker HR,
    3. Zeegers MP, et al.
    Pulmonary function in diabetes. A metaanalysis. Chest 2010; 138: 393–406. doi:10.1378/chest.09-2622
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Saini M,
    2. Kulandaivelan S,
    3. Bansal VK, et al.
    Pulmonary pathology among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Diabetes Rev 2020; 16: 759–769. doi:10.2174/1573399815666190716130324
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Matsubara T,
    2. Hara F
    . The pulmonary function and histopathological studies of the lung in diabetes mellitus. Nippon Ika Daigaku Zashi 1991: 58: 528–536. doi:10.1272/jnms1923.58.528
    OpenUrl
    1. Lara-Rodríguez DA,
    2. Varela González JH,
    3. Verlezza S, et al.
    Disfunción pulmonar en pacientes diabéticos no insulinodependientes. Med Interna (Caracas) 1995; 11: 17–28.
    OpenUrl
    1. Barret-Connor E,
    2. Frette C
    . NIDDM, impaired glucose tolerance, and pulmonary function in older adults. Diabetes Care 1996; 19: 1441–1444. doi:10.2337/diacare.19.12.1441
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Katoh J,
    2. Hara Y,
    3. Kurusu M, et al.
    Cardiorespiratory function as assessed by exercise testing in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. J Int Med Res 1996; 24: 209–213. doi:10.1177/030006059602400205
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Isotani H,
    2. Nakamura Y,
    3. Kameoka K, et al.
    Pulmonary diffusing capacity, serum angiotensin-converting enzyme activity and the angiotensin-converting enzyme gene in Japanese non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus patients. Diab Res Clin Pract 1999; 43: 173–177. doi:10.1016/S0168-8227(99)00006-6
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Benbassat CA,
    2. Stern E,
    3. Kramer M, et al.
    Pulmonary function in patients with diabetes mellitus. Am J Med Sci 2001; 322: 127–132. doi:10.1097/00000441-200109000-00003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Zamarrón C,
    2. del Campo F,
    3. Paredes C, et al.
    Estudio de la difusión pulmonar de monóxido de carbono en dos situaciones clínicas: asma bronquial y diabetes mellitus. An Med Intern (Madrid) 2001; 18: 237–242.
    OpenUrl
    1. Ari G,
    2. Itil O,
    3. Çömlekçi A, et al.
    Pulmonary function tests and inhalation perfusion scintigraphy findings in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Turk Thorac J 2002; 3: 257–265.
    OpenUrl
    1. Guazzi M,
    2. Brambilla R,
    3. De Vita S, et al.
    Diabetes worsens pulmonary diffusion in heart failure, and insulin counteracts this effect. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2002; 166: 978–982. doi:10.1164/rccm.200203-234OC
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Maiolo C,
    2. Mohamed EI,
    3. Di Daniele N, et al.
    Body composition and pulmonary function in obese type 2 diabetic women. Diab Nutr Metab 2002; 15: 20–25.
    OpenUrl
    1. Boulbou MS,
    2. Gourgoulianis K,
    3. Petinaki EA, et al.
    Pulmonary function and circulating adhesion molecules in patients with diabetes mellitus. Can Respir J 2003; 10: 259–264. doi:10.1155/2003/295238
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Guvener N,
    2. Tutuncu NB,
    3. Ackay S, et al.
    Alveolar gas exchange in patients with type-2 diabetes mellitus. Endocrine J 2033; 50: 663–667. doi:10.1507/endocrj.50.663
    OpenUrl
    1. Melo E,
    2. Vianna EO,
    3. Gallo L Jr., et al.
    Pulmonary function, cholinergic bronchomotor tone, and cardiac autonomic abnormalities in type 2 diabetic patients. Braz J Med Biol Res 2003; 36: 291–299. doi:10.1590/S0100-879X2003000300002
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Lau AC,
    2. Lo MK,
    3. Leung GT, et al.
    Altered exercise gas exchange as related to microalbuminuria in type 2 diabetic patients. Chest 2004; 125: 1292–1298. doi:10.1378/chest.125.4.1292
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Sinha S,
    2. Guleria R,
    3. Misra A, et al.
    Pulmonary functions in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and correlation with microvascular complications. Indian J Med Res 2004; 119: 66–71.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Weisbrod CJ,
    2. Eastwwod PR,
    3. O'Driscoll GO, et al.
    Abnormal ventilatory responses to hypoxia in type 2 diabetes. Diabetic Med 2005; 22: 563–568. doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2005.01458.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Meo SA,
    2. Al-Drees AM,
    3. Arif M, et al.
    Lung function in type 2 Saudi diabetic patients. Saudi Med J 2006; 27: 338–343.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Ortiz-Aguirre AR,
    2. Vargas MH,
    3. Torres-Cruz A, et al.
    Cambios espirométricos relacionados con la edad en pacientes diabéticos. Rev Invetig Clin 2006; 58: 109–118.
    OpenUrl
    1. Özsahin K,
    2. Tugrul A,
    3. Mert S, et al.
    Evaluation of pulmonary alveolo-capillary permeability in type 2 diabetes mellitus using technetium 99mTc-DTPA aerosol scintigraphy and carbon monoxide diffusion capacity. J Diab Complications 2006; 20: 205–209. doi:10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2005.07.003
    OpenUrl
    1. Chance WW,
    2. Rhee C,
    3. Yilmaz C, et al.
    Diminished alveolar microvascular reserves in type 2 diabetes reflect systemic microangiopathy. Diabetes Care 2008; 31: 1596–1601. doi:10.2337/dc07-2323
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Dennis RJ,
    2. Maldonado D,
    3. Rojas MX, et al.
    [Diabetes mellitus tipo 2 y deterioro de la función pulmonar]. Acta Med Colomb 2008; 33: 105–110.
    OpenUrl
    1. Kabitz HJ,
    2. Sonntag F,
    3. Walker D, et al.
    Diabetic polyneuropathy is associated with respiratory muscle impairment in type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia 2008; 51: 191–197. doi:10.1007/s00125-007-0856-0
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Yeh HC,
    2. Punjabi NM,
    3. Wang NY, et al.
    Cross-sectional and prospective study of lung function in adults with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2008; 31: 741–746. doi:10.2337/dc07-1464
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Ali O,
    2. Begum S,
    3. Begum N, et al.
    FEV1 and FEV1/FVC% in type 2 diabetes and their relationships with duration of the disease. J Bangladesh Soc Physiol 2009; 4: 81–87. doi:10.3329/jbsp.v4i2.4178
    OpenUrl
    1. Saler T,
    2. Cakmak G,
    3. Saglam ZA, et al.
    The assessment of pulmonary diffusing capacity in diabetes mellitus with regard to microalbuminuria. Intern Med 2009; 48: 1939–1943. doi:10.2169/internalmedicine.48.2417
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Verma S,
    2. Goni M,
    3. Kudyar RP
    . Assessment of pulmonary functions in patients with diabetes mellitus. JK Science 2009; 11: 71–74.
    OpenUrl
    1. Agarwal AS,
    2. Fuladi AB,
    3. Mishra G, et al.
    Spirometry and diffusion studies in patients with type-2 diabetes mellitus and their association with microvascular complications. Indian J Chest Dis Allied Sci 2010; 52: 213–216.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Ali O,
    2. Begum S,
    3. Begum N, et al.
    PEFR and FEF25–75% in type 2 diabetes mellitus and their relationships with its duration. J Bangladesh Soc Physiol 2010; 5: 14–19. doi:10.3329/jbsp.v5i1.5413
    OpenUrl
    1. Lecube A,
    2. Sampol G,
    3. Muñoz X, et al.
    Type 2 diabetes impairs pulmonary function in morbidly obese women: a case–control study. Diabetologia 2010; 53: 1210–1216. doi:10.1007/s00125-010-1700-5
    OpenUrl
  10. ↵
    1. Ozoh OB,
    2. Okubabejo NU,
    3. Bandele EO, et al.
    Ventilatory function in Nigerians with type 2 diabetes. African J Respir Med 2010: 18–22.
    1. Büyükhatipoglu H,
    2. Çelik K,
    3. Eren MA, et al.
    [The association between microalbuminuria and carbon monoxide diffusion capacity in patients with type-II diabetes mellitus]. Duzce Med J 2011; 13: 30–35.
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. Ceylan E,
    2. Turan MN,
    3. Günak F
    . Relationship between diabetes control and pulmonary functions with type ii diabetes mellitus patients. Üzmir GÛs Hastanesi Dergisi 2011; 25: 101–106.
    OpenUrl
    1. Dharwadkar AR,
    2. Dharwadkar AA,
    3. Banu G, et al.
    Reduction in lung functions in type-2 diabetes in Indian population: correlation with glycemic status. Indian J Physiol Pharmacol 2011; 55: 170–175.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Kim HK,
    2. Kim CM,
    3. Jung YJ, et al.
    Association of restrictive ventilatory dysfunction with insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes in Koreans. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes 2011; 19: 47–52. doi:10.1055/s-0030-1268467
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. Klein OL,
    2. Meltzer D,
    3. Carnethon M, et al.
    Type II diabetes mellitus is associated with decreased measures of lung function in a clinical setting. Respir Med 2011; 105: 1095–1098. doi:10.1016/j.rmed.2011.03.010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Al-Habbo DJS,
    2. Al-Ameen AM
    . Diabetes mellitus and lung function tests. Ann Coll Med Mosul 2012; 38: 27–32. doi:10.33899/mmed.2012.50056
    OpenUrl
    1. Klein OL,
    2. Jones M,
    3. Lee J, et al.
    Reduced lung diffusion capacity in type 2 diabetes is independent of heart failure. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2012; 96: e73–e75. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2012.02.014
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Klein OL,
    2. Kalhan R,
    3. Williams MV, et al.
    Lung spirometry parameters and diffusion capacity are decreased in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabet Med 2012; 29: 212–219. doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2011.03394.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    1. Nandhini R,
    2. Syed afina SS,
    3. Saikumar P
    . Respiratory myopathy in type II diabetes mellitus. J Clin Diag Res 2012; 6: 354–357.
    OpenUrl
    1. Abd-El-Azeem A,
    2. Hamdy G,
    3. Amin M, et al.
    Pulmonary function changes in diabetic lung. Egypt J Chest Dis Tuberc 2013; 62: 513–517. doi:10.1016/j.ejcdt.2013.07.006
    OpenUrl
    1. Akber ZA,
    2. Al-Edani NI,
    3. Khalid LO
    . Pulmonary function in type 2 diabetic patients in Basrah. N Iraqi J Med 2013; 9: 76–81.
    OpenUrl
  15. ↵
    1. Alkinany ASG
    . Pulmonary function tests in male patients with type II diabetes mellitus. J Basrah Res Sci 2013; 39: 182–187.
    OpenUrl
    1. Anandhalakshmi S,
    2. Manikandan S,
    3. Ganeshkumar P, et al.
    Alveolar gas exchange and pulmonary functions in patients with type II diabetes mellitus. J Clin Diagn Res 2013; 7: 1874–1877.
    OpenUrl
    1. Aparna A
    . Pulmonary function tests in type 2 diabetics and non-diabetic people - A comparative study. J Clin Diagn Res 2013; 7: 1606–1608.
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. Rajani M,
    2. Manoj DK,
    3. Rajeev R, et al.
    Study of pulmonary function tests in type-2 diabetes mellitus. Pulmon 2013; 15: 19–24.
    OpenUrl
    1. Shafiee G,
    2. Khamseh ME,
    3. Rezaei N, et al.
    Alteration of pulmonary function in diabetic nephropathy. J Diab Metab Disord 2013; 12: 15. doi:10.1186/2251-6581-12-15
    OpenUrl
    1. Shah SH,
    2. Sonawane P,
    3. Nahar P, et al.
    Pulmonary function tests in type 2 diabetes mellitus and their association with glycemic control and duration of the disease. Lung India 2013; 30: 108–112. doi:10.4103/0970-2113.110417
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Huang H,
    2. Guo Q,
    3. Li L, et al.
    Effect of type 2 diabetes mellitus on pulmonary function. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes 2014; 122: 322–326. doi:10.1055/s-0034-1372579
    OpenUrl
  17. ↵
    1. Jamatia SNN,
    2. Wangkheimayum K,
    3. Singh WA, et al.
    Effect of glycemic status on lung function tests in type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Med Soc 2014; 2: 69–72. doi:10.4103/0972-4958.141071
    OpenUrl
    1. Uz-Zaman S,
    2. Banerjee J,
    3. Singhamahapatra A, et al.
    Assessment of lung function by spirometry and diffusion study and effect of glycemic control on pulmonary Function in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients of the eastern India. J Clin Diag Res 2014; 8: BC01-4.
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. Zineldin MAF,
    2. Hasan KAG,
    3. Al-Adl AS
    . Respiratory function in type II diabetes mellitus. Egypt J Chest Dis Tuberc 2015; 64: 219–223. doi:10.1016/j.ejcdt.2014.08.008
    OpenUrl
    1. Buchmann N,
    2. Norman K,
    3. Steinhagen-Thiessen E, et al.
    Lungenfunktion bei älteren Probanden mit metabolischem Syndrom und Typ-2-Diabetes. Ergebnisse der Berliner Altersstudie II. Z Gerontol Geriat 2016; 49: 405–415. doi:10.1007/s00391-015-0959-z
    OpenUrl
    1. Kaur S,
    2. Agarwal N
    . Pulmonary function tests in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Arch Med Health Sci 2016; 4: 35–39. doi:10.4103/2321-4848.183338
    OpenUrl
    1. Kumar A,
    2. Bade G,
    3. Trivedi A, et al.
    Postural variation of pulmonary diffusing capacity as a marker of lung microangiopathy in Indian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Indian J Endocrinol Metab 2016; 20: 238–244. doi:10.4103/2230-8210.176343
    OpenUrl
    1. Caron J,
    2. DuManoir GR,
    3. Labrecque L, et al.
    Impact of type 2 diabetes on cardiorespiratory function and exercise performance. Physiol Rep 2017; 5: e13145. doi:10.14814/phy2.13145
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Khafaie MA,
    2. Salvi SS,
    3. Yajnik CS, et al.
    Air pollution and respiratory health among diabetic and non-diabetic subjects in Pune, India—results from the Wellcome Trust Genetic Study. Environ Sci Pollt Res 2017; 24: 15538–15546. doi:10.1007/s11356-017-9148-5
    OpenUrl
    1. Kim HY,
    2. Sohn TS,
    3. Seok H, et al.
    Prevalence and risk factors for reduced pulmonary function in diabetic patients: the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Korean J Intern Med 2017; 32: 682–689. doi:10.3904/kjim.2016.045
    OpenUrl
    1. López-Cano C,
    2. Lecube A,
    3. García-Ramírez M, et al.
    Serum surfactant protein D as a biomarker for measuring lung involvement in obese patients with type 2 diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2017; 102: 4109–4116. doi:10.1210/jc.2017-00913
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Nidhi A,
    2. Nayyer PS,
    3. Rana V, et al.
    Changes in pulmonary functions in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Indian J Med Spec 2017; 8: 3–6. doi:10.1016/j.injms.2016.09.007
    OpenUrl
  19. ↵
    1. Shergill N,
    2. Kumar A
    . A study of pulmonary functions in Punjabi type-2 diabetics and non-diabetics. J Exerc Sci Physiother 2017; 13: 60–64.
    OpenUrl
    1. Tai H,
    2. Wang M,
    3. Zhao Y, et al.
    Pulmonary function and retrobulbar hemodynamics in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Respir Care 2017; 62: 602–614. doi:10.4187/respcare.05129
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Wilms B,
    2. Ernst B,
    3. Thurnheer M, et al.
    Type 2 diabetes is associated with lower cardiorespiratory fitness independent of pulmonary function in severe obesity. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes 2017; 125: 301–306. doi:10.1055/s-0043-100102
    OpenUrl
    1. Okur I,
    2. Taspinar B,
    3. Atalay OT, et al.
    The effects of type 2 diabetes mellitus and its complications on physical and pulmonary functions: A case–control study. Physiother Theory Pract 2018; 36: 916–922. doi:10.1080/09593985.2018.1517198.
    OpenUrl
    1. Rohling M,
    2. Pesta D,
    3. Markgraf DF, et al.
    Metabolic determinants of impaired pulmonary function in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes 2018; 126: 584–589. doi:10.1055/a-0653-7135
    OpenUrl
    1. Tayarami A,
    2. Moazamian D,
    3. Farsi M, et al.
    Assessment of spirometric indices in patients with type 2 diabetes in Imam Hussein Hospital, Shahroud, Iran (2016–2017). Int J Health Stud 2018; 4: 17–20.
    OpenUrl
  20. ↵
    1. Van Eetvelde BLM,
    2. Cambier D,
    3. Vanden Wyngaert K, et al.
    The influence of clinically diagnosed neuropathy on respiratory muscle strength in type 2 diabetes mellitus. J Diab Res 2018; 2018: 8065938.
  21. ↵
    1. Goldman MD
    . Lung dysfunction in diabetes. Diabetes Care 2003; 26: 195–198.
    OpenUrl
    1. Kaparianos A,
    2. Argyropoulou E,
    3. Sampsonas F, et al.
    Pulmonary complications in diabetes mellitus. Chron Respir Dis 2008; 5: 2101–2108. doi:10.1177/1479972307086313
    OpenUrl
    1. Tiengo A,
    2. Fadini GP,
    3. Avogaro A
    . The metabolic syndrome, diabetes and lung dysfunction. Diab Metab 2008; 34: 447–454. doi:10.1016/j.diabet.2008.08.001
    OpenUrl
    1. Klein OL,
    2. Krishnan JA,
    3. Glick S, et al.
    Systematic review of the association between lung function and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabet Med 2010; 27: 977–987. doi:10.1111/j.1464-5491.2010.03073.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Pitocco D,
    2. Fuso L,
    3. Conte EG, et al.
    The diabetic lung - A new target organ? Rev Diabet Stud 2012; 9: 23–35. doi:10.1900/RDS.2012.9.23
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Lecube A,
    2. Simó R,
    3. Pallayoba M, et al.
    Pulmonary function and sleep breathing: two new targets for type 2 diabetes care. Endocrin Rev 2017; 38: 550–573. doi:10.1210/er.2017-00173
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Tashkin DP,
    2. Celli B,
    3. Senn S, et al.
    UPLIFT study investigators. A 4-year trial of tiotropium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 1543–1554. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0805800
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Hanania NA,
    2. Feldman G,
    3. Zachgo W, et al.
    The efficacy and safety of the novel long-acting β2 agonist vilanterol in patients with COPD: a randomized placebo-controlled trial. Chest 2012; 142: 119–127. doi:10.1378/chest.11-2231
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Ehrlich SF,
    2. Quesenberry CP Jr.,
    3. Van den Eeden SK, et al.
    Patients diagnosed with diabetes are at increased risk for asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pulmonary fibrosis, and pneumonia but not lung cancer. Diabetes Care 2010; 33: 55–60. doi:10.2337/dc09-0880
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  26. ↵
    1. Al-Rifai RH,
    2. Pearson F,
    3. Critchley JA, et al.
    Association between diabetes mellitus and active tuberculosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2017; 12: e0187967.
    OpenUrl
  27. ↵
    1. Talaminos Barroso A,
    2. Márquez Martín A,
    3. Roa Romero LA, et al.
    Factors affecting lung function: a review of the literature. Arch Bronconeumol 2018; 54: 327–332. doi:10.1016/j.arbres.2018.01.030
    OpenUrl
  28. ↵
    1. Forno E,
    2. Hang YY,
    3. Mullen J, et al.
    Overweight, obesity, and lung function in children and adults – a meta-analysis. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2018; 6: 570–581. doi:10.1016/j.jaip.2017.07.010
    OpenUrl
  29. ↵
    1. Wang S,
    2. Sun X,
    3. Tsia TH, et al.
    The effect of body mass index on spirometry tests among adults in Xi'an, China. Medicine 2017; 96: e6596. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000006596
    OpenUrl
  30. ↵
    1. Peters U,
    2. Dixon AE
    . The effect of obesity on lung function. Expert rev Respir Med 2018; 12: 755–767. doi:10.1080/17476348.2018.1506331
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  31. ↵
    1. Foster DJ,
    2. Ravikumar P,
    3. Bellotto DJ, et al.
    Fatty diabetic lung: altered alveolar structure and surfactant protein expression. Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol 2010; 298: L392–L403. doi:10.1152/ajplung.00041.2009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Vracko R,
    2. Thorning D,
    3. Huang TW
    . Basal lamina of alveolar epithelium and capillaries: quantitative changes with aging and in diabetes mellitus. Am Rev Respir Dis 1979; 120: 973–983.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Weynand B,
    2. Jonckheere A,
    3. Frans A, et al.
    Diabetes mellitus induces a thickening of the pulmonary basal lamina. Respiration 1999; 66: 14–19. doi:10.1159/000029331
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    1. Talakatta G,
    2. Sarikhani M,
    3. Muhamed J, et al.
    Diabetes induces fibrotic changes in the lung through the activation of TGF-β signaling pathways. Scient Rep 2018; 8: 11920. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-30449-y
    OpenUrl
  35. ↵
    1. Lin CC,
    2. Chang CT,
    3. Li TC, et al.
    Objective evidence of impairment of alveolar integrity in patients with non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus using radionuclide inhalation lung scan. Lung 2002; 180: 181–186. doi:10.1007/s004080000092
    OpenUrlPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Kuziemski K,
    2. Pienkowska J,
    3. Slominski W, et al.
    Pulmonary capillary permeability and pulmonary microangiopathy in diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2015; 108: e56–e59. doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2015.02.033
    OpenUrl
  37. ↵
    1. Zheng H,
    2. Wu J,
    3. Jin Z, et al.
    Potential biochemical mechanisms of lung injury in diabetes. Aging Dis 2017; 8: 7–16. doi:10.14336/AD.2016.0627
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top
Vol 7 Issue 1 Table of Contents
ERJ Open Research: 7 (1)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Pulmonary function tests in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Citation Tools
Pulmonary function tests in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis
Jesús Díez-Manglano, Uxua Asìn Samper
ERJ Open Research Jan 2021, 7 (1) 00371-2020; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00371-2020

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Pulmonary function tests in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis
Jesús Díez-Manglano, Uxua Asìn Samper
ERJ Open Research Jan 2021, 7 (1) 00371-2020; DOI: 10.1183/23120541.00371-2020
Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Supplementary material
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Subjects

  • Lung structure and function
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

Original articles

  • Endobronchial autologous BM-MSCs in IPF patients
  • Effect of β-blockers on the risk of COPD exacerbations
  • Recurrence of symptoms after childhood LRTI
Show more Original articles

Lung function

  • Period and cohort effects
  • Infant lung function and physical activity in pregnancy
  • BMI increase: risk factor for FEV1 decline in asthma
Show more Lung function

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About ERJ Open Research

  • Editorial board
  • Journal information
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Publication ethics and malpractice
  • Submit a manuscript

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Online ISSN: 2312-0541

Copyright © 2023 by the European Respiratory Society