Results

RDF/XMLNTriplesTurtleShow queryShare ▶
SubjectPredicateObject
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#typehttp://purl.uniprot.org/core/Journal_Citation
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#comment"

Background

The diagnosis of diabetes mellitus (DM) is based on either fasting plasma glucose levels or an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT). Recently, an HbA₁c value of ≥ 48 mmol/mol (6.5%) has been included as an additional test to diagnose DM. The purpose of this study was to validate HbA1c versus OGTT as a method to diagnose DM in vascular surgery patients.

Methods

The study population consisted of 345 patients admitted consecutively due to peripheral arterial disease. Sixty-seven patients were previously diagnosed with DM. Glucose levels of OGTT and HbA₁c values were analyzed in 275 patients. The OGTT results were categorized into three groups according to the World Health Organization 1999 criteria: 1) DM defined as fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≥ 7.0 mmol/L and/or two-hour value (2-h-value) ≥ 11.1 mmol/L; 2) intermediate hyperglycaemia, which consists of IGT (FPG < 7.0 mmol/L and a 2-h-value between 7.8 mmol/L and 11.1 mmol/L), and IFG (fasting glucose value between 6.1 mmol/L and 7.0 mmol/L with a normal 2-h-value); and 3) normal glucose metabolism defined as FPG < 6.1 mmol/L and a 2-h-value < 7.8 mmol/L.

Results

Of the 275 patients on whom OGTT was performed, 33 were diagnosed with DM, 90 with intermediate hyperglycaemia and 152 had normal glucose metabolism. An HbA₁c value of ≥ 48 mmol/mol (6.5%) detected DM with a 45.5% sensitivity and a 90% specificity compared with the OGTT results. Combining the measurements of the HbA₁c value with the fasting plasma glucose level (≥7.0 mmol/L) increased the sensitivity to 64%. The total prevalence of DM and intermediate hyperglycaemia was 85% based on HbA1c values and 45% based on the OGTT.

Conclusions

Compared with the OGTT the HbA₁c cut-off value of ≥ 48 mmol/mol (6.5%) had a 45.5% sensitivity to diagnose DM in patients with peripheral arterial disease. OGTT and HbA₁c categorized different individuals with DM and intermediate hyperglycaemia. The total prevalence of pathologic glucose metabolism was substantially higher based on HbA₁c values than based on OGTT. The high prevalence of DM and intermediate hyperglycaemia when using HbA₁c in this study may reflect a high chronic glycaemic burden in patients with peripheral arterial disease. Further studies on vascular surgery patients are needed to identify which method, OGTT or HbA₁c, is the better in predicting DM and future clinical development of vascular disease.

Trial registration

REK vest 14109."xsd:string
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://purl.org/dc/terms/identifier"doi:10.1186/1475-2840-12-79"xsd:string
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://purl.uniprot.org/core/author"Nilsen R.M."xsd:string
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://purl.uniprot.org/core/author"Softeland E."xsd:string
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://purl.uniprot.org/core/author"Astor M.C."xsd:string
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://purl.uniprot.org/core/author"Hjellestad I.D."xsd:string
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://purl.uniprot.org/core/author"Jonung T."xsd:string
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://purl.uniprot.org/core/date"2013"xsd:gYear
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://purl.uniprot.org/core/name"Cardiovasc Diabetol"xsd:string
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://purl.uniprot.org/core/pages"79"xsd:string
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://purl.uniprot.org/core/title"HbA(1)c versus oral glucose tolerance test as a method to diagnose diabetes mellitus in vascular surgery patients."xsd:string
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://purl.uniprot.org/core/volume"12"xsd:string
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#exactMatchhttp://purl.uniprot.org/pubmed/23705980
http://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/primaryTopicOfhttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23705980
http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/#_E1B2D1-mappedCitation-23705980http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#objecthttp://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980
http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/#_D1MGQ2-mappedCitation-23705980http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#objecthttp://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980
http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/#_E9M4D4-mappedCitation-23705980http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#objecthttp://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980
http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/#_Q7Z7B4-mappedCitation-23705980http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#objecthttp://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980
http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/#_I1VZV6-mappedCitation-23705980http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#objecthttp://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980
http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/#_Q86YL2-mappedCitation-23705980http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#objecthttp://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980
http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/#_Q86YQ1-mappedCitation-23705980http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#objecthttp://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980
http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/#_Q86YQ4-mappedCitation-23705980http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#objecthttp://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980
http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/#_Q86YQ5-mappedCitation-23705980http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#objecthttp://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980
http://purl.uniprot.org/uniprot/#_P69905-mappedCitation-23705980http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#objecthttp://purl.uniprot.org/citations/23705980
▶