Table 4.
Motor nerve conduction velocity and sensory action potentials in age-matched controls and STZ-induced diabetics
| Duration of diabetes | Age-matched controls | STZ-induced diabetes |
|---|---|---|
| A. Motor nerve conduction velocity (m s−1) | ||
| 1–2 weeks | 46.0 ± 2.0 (n = 12) | 42.4 ± 2.1 (n = 11) |
| 8–10 weeks | 60.8 ± 2.8 (n = 6) | 53.0 ± 2.1 (n = 11) |
| 18–20 weeks | 64.7 ± 2.2 (n = 10) | 59.5 ± 2.6 (n = 7) |
| B. Sensory action potential amplitude (nV) | ||
| 1–2 weeks | 20.3 ± 2.8 (n = 9) | 26.4 ± 2.1 (n = 8) |
| 8–10 weeks | 40.8 ± 3.7 (n = 6) | 45.6 ± 5.3 (n = 11) |
| 18–20 weeks | 83.7 ± 4.2 (n = 10) | 61.1 ± 8.3 (n = 7)* |
A, motor nerve conduction velocity increased with maturation in both controls (P = 4.414 ± 10−6, analysis for linear trend) and STZ-induced diabetics (P = 1.341 ± 10−5, analysis for linear trend). Although there was a significant difference between control and STZ-induced diabetic motor nerve conduction velocities (P = 0.0066, two-way ANOVA), age-by-age comparison of the two groups did not reveal significant differences. Data are given as means ± s.e.m. B, the amplitude of sensory action potentials also increased with maturation in age-matched controls (P = 7.16 ± 10−12, analysis for linear trend)and STZ-induced diabetics (P = 0.0022, analysis for linear trend). The two groups differed significantly from each other after 18–20 weeks of diabetes. Data are given as means ± s.e.m.
P < 0.05 compared to age-matched controls.