Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Diabetes Care ; 40(9): 1181-1186, 2017 09.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28724718

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the compliance with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) and the reliability of diabetes logbooks in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM), as well as the associated determinants and outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We prospectively selected French-speaking women with newly diagnosed GDM who had been referred to our diabetes management program and understood SMBG principles. At the next follow-up visit, we collected SMBG results from glucose meters and logbooks. We analyzed pregnancy outcomes. RESULTS: Data were analyzed over 13 ± 3 days in 91 women. Only 61.5% had performed ≥80% of the required tests. Poor compliance was associated with a family history of diabetes, social deprivation, and non-European origin. The average time between pre- and postprandial tests was 141 ± 20 min, with 46.5% of women performing ≥80% of postprandial measurements 100-140 min after meals. Inadequate timing was associated with ethnicity and higher HbA1c at baseline. A total of 23.1% of women had <90% matched values in diary and meter memory, and a poor concordance was associated with a family history of diabetes. Poor adherence was associated with more preeclampsia (12.2 vs. 1.9%, P = 0.049), and inadequate postprandial test timing with a higher HbA1c at delivery (5.3 ± 0.4 vs. 5.0 ± 0.3% [34 ± 2 vs. 31 ± 2 mmol/mol], P < 0.01), despite more frequent insulin therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Although women with GDM are considered to be highly motivated, SMBG adherence and reliability are of concern and may be associated with poor gestational prognosis, suggesting that caregivers should systematically check the glucose meter memory to improve GDM management.


Asunto(s)
Automonitorización de la Glucosa Sanguínea , Glucemia/metabolismo , Diabetes Gestacional/sangre , Cooperación del Paciente , Resultado del Embarazo , Adulto , Índice de Masa Corporal , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Hemoglobina Glucada/metabolismo , Humanos , Insulina/sangre , Insulina/uso terapéutico , Periodo Posprandial , Embarazo , Estudios Prospectivos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados
2.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab ; 99(3): 996-1005, 2014 Mar.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24423342

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: The performance of standard selective screening strategies for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) may vary according to ethnicity. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the diagnostic and prognostic performance of a selective screening tool to determine whether it accurately predicts GDM and events in women of different ethnicities. The tool selectively screens based on patients having one or more of the following risk factors (RFs): body mass index ≥25 kg/m(2), age ≥35 years, family history of diabetes, and personal history of GDM or macrosomia. DESIGN AND SETTING: We conducted an observational prospective study at a university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: We included 17 344 women of European (30.9%), North African (29.6%), Sub-Saharan African (22.2%), Caribbean (8.7%), Indian-Pakistani-Sri Lankan (5.5%), and Asian (3.3%) ethnicities who were without pregravid diabetes and had singleton deliveries (2002-2010). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We universally screened GDM and GDM-related events (pre-eclampsia, birth weight ≥4000 g, or dystocia). RESULTS: Independent of confounding factors, North African (odds ratio [OR], 1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.21-1.52; P < .001) and Indian-Pakistani-Sri Lankan (OR, 2.52; 95% CI, 2.13-3.00; P < .001) women had more GDM than Europeans, whereas Sub-Saharan African women had less (OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71-0.94; P < .01). Having one or more RFs was associated with GDM among Europeans (OR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.22-1.76), North African (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.13-1.55), Sub-Saharan African (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.20-1.83), and Caribbean (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.12-2.14) women. Having one or more RFs was also associated with GDM-related events only in European (P < .01) and North African (P < .05) women, with the following incidences in Europeans: no GDM/no RF, 6.9%; no GDM/RF, 9.0%; GDM/no RF, 14.7%; and GDM/RF, 12.6%. CONCLUSION: Standard selective screening criteria were not predictive of GDM in women from India-Pakistan-Sri Lanka and Asia and were associated with GDM-related events only in European and North African women. However, the women with GDM, who were routinely treated, had a poor prognosis, even for those free of RFs. These results support universal screening, irrespective of ethnicity.


Asunto(s)
Diabetes Gestacional/diagnóstico , Diabetes Gestacional/etnología , Etnicidad/estadística & datos numéricos , Diagnóstico Prenatal/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Europa (Continente)/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Tamizaje Masivo/métodos , Tamizaje Masivo/estadística & datos numéricos , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Embarazo , Pronóstico , Adulto Joven
3.
Diabetes Care ; 36(7): 2070-6, 2013 Jul.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23378625

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether glycation gap (G-Gap), an index of intracellular glycation of proteins, was associated with diabetes complications. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We measured concomitantly HbA1c and fructosamine in 925 patients with type 2 diabetes to calculate the G-Gap, defined as the difference between measured HbA1c, and fructosamine-based predicted HbA1c. Patients were explored for retinopathy, nephropathy, peripheral neuropathy, cardiac autonomic neuropathy (n = 512), and silent myocardial ischemia (n = 506). RESULTS: Macroproteinuria was the only complication that was associated with G-Gap (prevalence in the first, second, and third tertile of G-Gap: 2.9, 6.2, and 11.0%, respectively; P < 0.001). The G-Gap was higher in patients with macroproteinuria than in those without (1.06 ± 1.62 vs. 0.03 ± 1.30%; P < 0.0001). Because HbA1c was associated with both G-Gap (HbA1c 7.0 ± 1.4, 7.9 ± 1.4, and 10.1 ± 1.8% in the first, second, and third G-Gap tertile, respectively; P < 0.0001) and macroproteinuria (HbA1c 8.8 ± 2.2% if macroproteinuria, 8.3 ± 2.0% if none; P < 0.05), and because it could have been a confounder, we matched 54 patients with macroproteinuria and 200 patients without for HbA1c. Because macroproteinuria was associated with lower serum albumin and fructosamine levels, which might account for higher G-Gap, we calculated in this subpopulation albumin-indexed fructosamine and G-Gap; macroproteinuria was independently associated with male sex (odds ratio [OR] 3.2 [95% CI 1.5-6.7]; P < 0.01), hypertension (2.9 [1.1-7.5]; P < 0.05), and the third tertile of albumin-indexed G-Gap (2.3 [1.1-4.4]; P < 0.05) in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In type 2 diabetic patients, G-Gap was associated with macroproteinuria, independently of HbA1c, albumin levels, and confounding factors, suggesting a specific role of intracellular glycation susceptibility on kidney glomerular changes.


Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Proteinuria/metabolismo , Anciano , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/metabolismo , Nefropatías Diabéticas/metabolismo , Femenino , Fructosamina/metabolismo , Hemoglobina Glucada/metabolismo , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA