Oral glucose tolerance test and HbA1c for diagnosis of diabetes in patients undergoing coronary angiography: [corrected] the Silent Diabetes Study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The primary aim of this study was to compare the results of HbA(1c) measurements with those of an OGTT for early diagnosis of 'silent diabetes' in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing angiography without prediagnosed diabetes. A secondary aim was to investigate the correlation between the extent of CAD and the glycaemic status of the patient. METHODS: Data from 1,015 patients admitted for acute (n = 149) or elective (n = 866) coronary angiography were analysed. Patients with known diabetes were excluded from the study. Using the OGTT results, patients were classified as having normal glucose tolerance (NGT), impaired fasting glucose (IFG), impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) or diabetes. According to the results of the HbA(1c) measurements, patients were classified into three groups: normal (HbA(1c) <5.7% [<39 mmol/mol]), borderline (HbA(1c) 5.7-6.4% [39-47 mmol/mol]) and diabetes (HbA(1c) ≥6.5% [≥48 mmol/mol]). RESULTS: Based on the OGTT, 513 patients (51%) were classified with NGT, 10 (1%) with IFG, 349 (34%) with IGT and 149 (14%) were diagnosed with diabetes. According to HbA(1c) measurements, 588 patients (58%) were classified as normal, 385 (38%) as borderline and 42 (4%) were diagnosed with diabetes. The proportion of patients with IGT and diabetes increased with the extent of CAD (IGT ρ = 0.14, p < 0.001, diabetes ρ = 0.09, p = 0.01). No differences in HbA(1c) were seen among the groups with different extents of CAD (p = 0.652). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: An OGTT should be performed routinely for diagnosis of diabetes in patients with CAD undergoing coronary angiography, since HbA(1c) measurement alone appears to miss a substantial proportion of patients with silent diabetes. A limitation of the study is that the OGTT was not performed before the angiography.

Glucose monitoring by microdialysis: performance in a multicentre study.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the performance of the Continuous Research Tool (CRT) in a multicentre clinical-experimental study. METHODS: Three patient groups totalling 28 subjects with diabetes [group A 10 Type 1 (Ulm), group B 10 Type 1 (Neuss), group C eight Type 2 (Aarhus)] participated in this trial. Two CRT microdialysis probes were inserted in parallel in the abdominal subcutaneous tissue for 120 h in each subject. In subjects in group A, glucose excursions were induced on one study day and those in group B underwent a glucose clamp (eu-, hypo- or hyperglycaemic) on one study day. CRT data were calibrated once with a retrospective calibration model based on a run-in time of 24 h and three blood glucose measurements per day. RESULTS: All analysable experiments, covering a broad range of blood glucose values, yielded highly accurate data for the complete experimental time with a mean relative absolute difference of 12.8 +/- 6.0% and a predictive residual error sum of squares of 15.6 +/- 6.3 (mean +/- SD). Of all measurement results, 98.2% were in zones A and B of the error grid analysis. The average absolute differences were 1.14 mmol/l for Type 1 and 0.88 mmol/l for Type 2 diabetic patients. Relative absolute differences were 16.0% for Type 1 and 12.6% for Type 2 diabetic patients. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that this microdialysis system allows reliable continuous glucose monitoring in patients with diabetes of either type.