Level C· Early Human ResearchProspective Study

Biochemical markers of bone metabolism and bone mineral density in patients with type 2 diabetic foot ulcer.

Xu T., Sun Y., Huang P., Shi R., Yang J., Gu Y.

Prospective Study with a reported sample of 400 on Type 2 Diabetes, Diabetic Foot, published in BMC Endocr Disord (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.

This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.

Study type
Prospective Study
Journal
BMC Endocr Disord (2026)
Country
England
Reported sample size
400
PMID
42210208
DOI
10.1186/s12902-026-02328-5

Abstract (original English)

Type 2 diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is closely linked to disorders of bone metabolism and abnormal bone mineral density (BMD), while serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D], the gold standard for evaluating Vit D nutritional status, acts as an independent protective factor for DFU and is implicated in skeletal health regulation in diabetic patients. This cross-sectional study aimed to investigate biochemical markers of bone metabolism and BMD in patients with type 2 diabetic foot ulcer, and to identify risk factors for diabetic foot and accompanying gangrene. A total of 400 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) admitted to the Endocrinology Ward of Affiliated Hospital of Nantong University from December 2021 to May 2023 were enrolled, including 155 in the DF group and 245 in the non-diabetic foot (NDF) group. Clinical data, bone metabolism markers and BMD measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) were collected, and data were analyzed using SPSS 25.0 software. Compared with the NDF group, the DF group had older age, longer diabetes duration, higher systolic blood pressure (SBP), urinary albumin creatinine ratio (UACR) and type I collagen N-terminal propeptide (PINP) level, but lower levels of serum albumin (ALB), glycemic and lipid indicators, 25(OH)D, total BMD and hip regional B < 0.05), with a significantly higher prevalence of low bone mass and osteoporosis. Binar

What this study does not prove

  • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.

Evidence level

Early human evidence such as case series or small samples, often without a control group.

How we grade evidence
HumansDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Diabetic FootBone DensityFemaleBiomarkersCross-Sectional StudiesMaleMiddle AgedAged

Related research