Repeatability of 2 methods for assessment of insulin sensitivity and glucose dynamics in horses.
Abstract: Both the euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp (EHC) and minimal model analysis of the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGT) have been applied for measurement of insulin sensitivity in horses. However, no published data are available on the reproducibility of these methods. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the variation and repeatability of measures of glucose dynamics and insulin sensitivity in horses derived from minimal model analysis of the FSIGT and from the EHC method. Six healthy horses underwent both the FSIGT and EHC on 2 occasions over a 4-week period, with a minimum of 5 days between tests. Coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were calculated for measures of glucose metabolism and insulin sensitivity derived from each test. In the EHC, insulin sensitivity, expressed as the amount of metabolized glucose (M) per unit of serum insulin (I) (M/I ratio), averaged 0.19 +/- 0.06 x 10(-4) mmol/kg/min x (pmol/L)(-1) with an average interday CV of 14.1 +/- 5.7% (range, 7-20%) and ICC of 0.74. Minimal model analysis of the FSIGT demonstrated mean insulin sensitivity (Si) of 0.49 +/- 0.17 x 10(-4)/min x (pmol/L)(-1) with an average interday CV of 23.7 +/- 11.2% (range, 9-35%) and ICC of 0.33. Mean CV and ICC for minimal model glucose effectiveness (Sg) and acute insulin response (AIRg) were, respectively, 26.4 +/- 11.2% (range 13-40%) and 0.10 and 11.7 +/- 6.5% (range 7-21%) and 0.98. Insulin sensitivity measured by the EHC has lower interday variation when compared with the minimal model estimate derived from the FSIGT.
Publication Date: 2005-12-17 PubMed ID: 16355685DOI: 10.1892/0891-6640(2005)19[883:romfao]2.0.co;2Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
- Clinical Trial
- Comparative Study
- Journal Article
- Research Support
- Non-U.S. Gov't
Summary
This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.
The research article aims to analyze the repeatability and variation in two different methods used to measure insulin sensitivity and glucose dynamics in horses. The two methods examined are the euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp (EHC) and the minimal model analysis of the frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGT).
Methodology
- The study was carried out on six healthy horses over a period of four weeks. Both the EHC and FSIGT tests were conducted twice on each horse, with at least five days of gap between the tests.
- For each test, the coefficient of variation (CV) and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated. These measures were used to ascertain the reliability and repeatability of the methods in measuring glucose metabolism and insulin sensitivity in the horses.
Results – EHC Method
- The EHC method, which measures insulin sensitivity in the form of the amount of metabolized glucose per unit of serum insulin (known as the M/I ratio), showed an average interday CV of 14.1% with a range of 7-20%.
- The ICC for this method was found to be 0.74, indicating a good reliability.
- In other words, the degree of variation in insulin sensitivity measurements using the EHC method was relatively low, suggesting consistent and reliable results.
Results – FSIGT Method
- For the FSIGT method, insulin sensitivity (denoted by Si) was found to have an average interday CV of 23.7%, with a range of 9-35%.
- The ICC for this method was only 0.33, indicating relatively low reliability compared to the EHC method.
- Overall, the FSIGT method exhibited a higher degree of variation in the insulin sensitivity measurements compared to the EHC method.
Summary
- The study concludes that the EHC method has a smaller interday variation compared to the FSIGT method when measuring insulin sensitivity in horses. This suggests that the EHC method might provide more consistent and reliable measurements.
Cite This Article
APA
Pratt SE, Geor RJ, McCutcheon LJ.
(2005).
Repeatability of 2 methods for assessment of insulin sensitivity and glucose dynamics in horses.
J Vet Intern Med, 19(6), 883-888.
https://doi.org/10.1892/0891-6640(2005)19[883:romfao]2.0.co;2 Publication
Researcher Affiliations
- Department of Animal and Poultry Science, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1.
MeSH Terms
- Animals
- Area Under Curve
- Blood Glucose / metabolism
- Female
- Glucose Clamp Technique / methods
- Glucose Clamp Technique / veterinary
- Glucose Tolerance Test / veterinary
- Half-Life
- Horses / physiology
- Insulin Resistance / physiology
- Male
- Reproducibility of Results
Citations
This article has been cited 12 times.- Williams NJ, Furr M, Navas de Solis C, Campolo A, Davis M, Lacombe VA. Investigating the Relationship Between Cardiac Function and Insulin Sensitivity in Horses: A Pilot Study. Front Vet Sci 2022;9:899951.
- Kinsella HM, Hostnik LD, Snyder HA, Mazur SE, Kamr AM, Burns TA, Mossbarger JC, Toribio RE. Comparison of insulin sensitivity between healthy neonatal foals and horses using minimal model analysis. PLoS One 2022;17(1):e0262584.
- Lindåse S, Nostell K, Bergsten P, Forslund A, Bröjer J. Evaluation of fasting plasma insulin and proxy measurements to assess insulin sensitivity in horses. BMC Vet Res 2021 Feb 15;17(1):78.
- Montoya B, Briga M, Jimeno B, Verhulst S. Glucose regulation is a repeatable trait affected by successive handling in zebra finches. J Comp Physiol B 2020 Jul;190(4):455-464.
- Kritchevsky JE, Muir GS, Leschke DHZ, Hodgson JK, Hess EK, Bertin FR. Blood glucose and insulin concentrations after alpha-2-agonists administration in horses with and without insulin dysregulation. J Vet Intern Med 2020 Mar;34(2):902-908.
- van Bommel EJM, Ruiter D, Muskiet MHA, van Baar MJB, Kramer MHH, Nieuwdorp M, Joles JA, Bjornstad P, van Raalte DH. Insulin Sensitivity and Renal Hemodynamic Function in Metformin-Treated Adults With Type 2 Diabetes and Preserved Renal Function. Diabetes Care 2020 Jan;43(1):228-234.
- Horn R, Bertin FR. Evaluation of combined testing to simultaneously diagnose pituitary pars intermedia dysfunction and insulin dysregulation in horses. J Vet Intern Med 2019 Sep;33(5):2249-2256.
- Moser K, Banse H. Comparison of the glucose and insulin responses of horses to 2 formulations of corn syrup. Can Vet J 2019 Jun;60(6):637-643.
- Durham AE, Frank N, McGowan CM, Menzies-Gow NJ, Roelfsema E, Vervuert I, Feige K, Fey K. ECEIM consensus statement on equine metabolic syndrome. J Vet Intern Med 2019 Mar;33(2):335-349.
- Francisco R, Branco R, Schwab S, Baldani JI, Morais PV. Impact of plant-associated bacteria biosensors on plant growth in the presence of hexavalent chromium. World J Microbiol Biotechnol 2017 Dec 18;34(1):12.
- Lindåse S, Nostell K, Söder J, Bröjer J. Relationship Between β-cell Response and Insulin Sensitivity in Horses based on the Oral Sugar Test and the Euglycemic Hyperinsulinemic Clamp. J Vet Intern Med 2017 Sep;31(5):1541-1550.
- Dunbar LK, Mielnicki KA, Dembek KA, Toribio RE, Burns TA. Evaluation of Four Diagnostic Tests for Insulin Dysregulation in Adult Light-Breed Horses. J Vet Intern Med 2016 May;30(3):885-91.
Use Nutrition Calculator
Check if your horse's diet meets their nutrition requirements with our easy-to-use tool Check your horse's diet with our easy-to-use tool
Talk to a Nutritionist
Discuss your horse's feeding plan with our experts over a free phone consultation Discuss your horse's diet over a phone consultation
Submit Diet Evaluation
Get a customized feeding plan for your horse formulated by our equine nutritionists Get a custom feeding plan formulated by our nutritionists
