Hsu, C.-C.C.-C.HsuTsai, W.-C.W.-C.TsaiTZU-YU HSIAOFEN-YU TSENGShau, Y.-W.Y.-W.ShauWang, C.-L.C.-L.WangYIO-WHA SHAU2020-06-012020-06-0120090268-0033https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-68749104302&doi=10.1016%2fj.clinbiomech.2009.06.005&partnerID=40&md5=5c380a9bd304920f306c2367e01c1336https://scholars.lib.ntu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/495475Background: The study attempted to highlight the differences of mechanical properties in microchambers and macrochambers between patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and age-matched healthy volunteers. Methods: A total of 29 heels in 18 diabetic patients and 28 heels in 16 age-matched healthy participants were examined by a loading device consisting of a 10-MHz compact linear-array ultrasound transducer, a Plexiglas cylinder, and a load cell. Subjects in both groups were on average about 55 years old with a body mass index of approximately 25 kg/m2. A stepping motor was used to progressively load the transducer on the tested heels at a velocity of 6 mm/s from zero to the maximum stress of 78 kPa. Unloaded thickness, strain, and elastic modulus in microchambers, macrochambers and heel pads were measured. Findings: Microchambers strain in diabetic patients was significantly greater than that in healthy subjects (0.291 (SD 0.14) vs. 0.104 (SD 0.057); P < 0.001). Macrochambers strain in diabetic patients was significantly less than that in healthy subjects (0.355 (SD 0.098) vs. 0.450 (SD 0.092); P = 0.001). Microchambers stiffness in diabetic patients was significantly less than that in healthy persons (393 (SD 371) kPa vs. 1140 (SD 931) kPa; P < 0.001). Macrochambers stiffness in diabetic patients was significantly greater than that in healthy persons (239 (SD 77) kPa vs. 181 (SD 42) kPa; P = 0.001). Interpretation: Heel pad tissue properties are altered heterogeneously in people with diabetes. Increased macrochambers but decreased microchambers stiffness may cause diminished cushioning capacities in diabetic heels. ? 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.[SDGs]SDG3Body mass index; Diabetic foot; Diabetic patient; Healthy persons; Healthy subjects; Heel pads; Heels; Linear-array; Load cells; Loading devices; Maximum stress; Micro-chambers; Plexiglas; Tissue properties; Type 2 diabetes mellitus; Ultrasound transducers; Biomechanics; Cell membranes; Diffusers (optical); Loading; Mechanical properties; Piezoelectric transducers; Stiffness; Ultrasonic imaging; Ultrasonic transducers; Ultrasonography; Sugar (sucrose); adult; article; body mass; clinical article; controlled study; diabetic foot; female; heel; human; male; measurement; non insulin dependent diabetes mellitus; priority journal; velocity; Adipose Tissue; Diabetic Foot; Elastic Modulus; Female; Hardness; Heel; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Stress, Mechanical; Viscosityjournal article10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2009.06.005196199182-s2.0-68749104302