RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate two different criteria, one or two cut-off values, of oral glucose tolerance test with 75g of glucose for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus. METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving 120 records of pregnant women who received prenatal care at the service of a Brazilian university was carried out. Bivariate analysis of obstetric and perinatal outcomes was performed using the chi-square test. RESULTS: Considering criterion I, 12.5% of patients were diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus. Patients were 3.57 times more likely to have a large fetus for the gestational age at birth (p=0.038). Using criterion II, gestational diabetes mellitus was diagnosed in 5.8% of patients, macrosomia was 7.73 times more likely to be found in the presence of gestational diabetes mellitus (p=0.004), and a large fetus for the gestational age at birth was 8.17 times more likely (p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: There was a difference in the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus between the two criteria analyzed. The new criterion proposed increased prevalence.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Gestacional/diagnóstico , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Adulto , Brasil/epidemiología , Estudios Transversales , Diabetes Gestacional/epidemiología , Femenino , Edad Gestacional , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/métodos , Humanos , Embarazo , Atención Prenatal/métodos , Prevalencia , Estándares de Referencia , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
SUMMARY OBJECTIVE To evaluate two different criteria, one or two cut-off values, of oral glucose tolerance test with 75g of glucose for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus. METHODS A cross-sectional study involving 120 records of pregnant women who received prenatal care at the service of a Brazilian university was carried out. Bivariate analysis of obstetric and perinatal outcomes was performed using the chi-square test. RESULTS Considering criterion I, 12.5% of patients were diagnosed with gestational diabetes mellitus. Patients were 3.57 times more likely to have a large fetus for the gestational age at birth (p=0.038). Using criterion II, gestational diabetes mellitus was diagnosed in 5.8% of patients, macrosomia was 7.73 times more likely to be found in the presence of gestational diabetes mellitus (p=0.004), and a large fetus for the gestational age at birth was 8.17 times more likely (p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS There was a difference in the prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus between the two criteria analyzed. The new criterion proposed increased prevalence.
RESUMO OBJETIVO Avaliar dois critérios distintos, um ou dois valores de corte, do teste oral de tolerância à glicose com 75 g de glicose para o diagnóstico de diabetes mellitus gestacional. Métodos Estudo transversal envolvendo 120 prontuários de gestantes que realizaram pré-natal em um ambulatório de uma universidade brasileira. Análise bivariada dos resultados obstétricos e perinatais foi realizada pelo teste do qui-quadrado. Resultados Considerando o critério I, 12,5% das pacientes foram diagnosticadas com diabetes mellitus gestacional. As pacientes apresentaram uma chance 3,57 maior de ter um feto grande para a idade gestacional (p=0,038). Utilizando o critério II, o diabetes mellitus gestacional foi diagnosticado em 5,8% das pacientes. Mediante esse critério diagnóstico, a chance de macrossomia foi 7,73 vezes mais provável na presença de diabetes mellitus gestacional (p=0,004) e a chance de um feto grande para a idade gestacional foi 8,17 vezes maior de ocorrer (p=0,004). Conclusões Observou-se diferença na prevalência de diabetes melittus gestacional entre os dois critérios analisados, sendo que o novo critério proposto aumentou a prevalência.
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Femenino , Embarazo , Adulto , Adulto Joven , Diabetes Gestacional/diagnóstico , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Atención Prenatal/métodos , Estándares de Referencia , Factores de Tiempo , Brasil/epidemiología , Prevalencia , Estudios Transversales , Factores de Riesgo , Edad Gestacional , Diabetes Gestacional/epidemiología , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/métodosRESUMEN
AIMS: To evaluate the diagnostic criteria of the International Association of Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups (IADPSG) and alternative criteria in terms of resultant prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and measures of diagnostic impact. METHODS: The Brazilian Gestational Diabetes Study (EBDG) is a cohort of pregnant women enrolled consecutively in prenatal care clinics of the Brazilian National Health Service from 1991 to 1995, a time and setting in which those with lesser than diabetes hyperglycemia rarely received drug treatment. Eligibility criteria were age ≥20 years, gestational age 20-28 weeks and no history of diabetes outside pregnancy. After interview and anthropometric measurements, a standardized 2h 75g OGTT was scheduled. Women were followed through early postpartum. RESULTS: Prevalence of GDM defined by IADPSG criteria was 18.0% (95% CI 16.9-19.0), ranging from 2.7 to 17.0% with the alternative criteria. Relative risks for large for gestational age (LGA) and preeclampsia were generally small. The diagnostic impact assessed by pre- to post-test gain in the probability of an outcome was also small (3.6% for LGA and 0.5% for preeclampsia). Alternative criteria reached maximum gains of 9.7% and 5.3%, respectively. The fractions of LGA births and preeclampsia attributable to GDM by the IADPSG criteria were small, 6.7% and 3.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The IADPSG criteria identify more women as having GDM but their diagnostic and population impacts with respect to adverse outcomes are small. Alternative definitions, although also presenting small diagnostic and population impacts, showed advantages which may be useful in specific settings.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Gestacional/diagnóstico , Diabetes Gestacional/epidemiología , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Adulto , Brasil/epidemiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Macrosomía Fetal/diagnóstico , Macrosomía Fetal/epidemiología , Edad Gestacional , Humanos , Hiperglucemia/diagnóstico , Hiperglucemia/epidemiología , Recién Nacido , Agencias Internacionales/normas , Periodo Posparto , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto/normas , Preeclampsia/diagnóstico , Preeclampsia/epidemiología , Embarazo , Resultado del Embarazo/epidemiología , Atención Prenatal , PronósticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Two criteria based on a 2 h 75 g OGTT are being used for the diagnosis of gestational diabetes (GDM), those recommended over the years by the World Health Organization (WHO), and those recently recommended by the International Association for Diabetes in Pregnancy Study Group (IADPSG), the latter generated in the HAPO study and based on pregnancy outcomes. Our aim is to systematically review the evidence for the associations between GDM (according to these criteria) and adverse outcomes. METHODS: We searched relevant studies in MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, the Cochrane Library, CINHAL, WHO-Afro library, IMSEAR, EMCAT, IMEMR and WPRIM. We included cohort studies permitting the evaluation of GDM diagnosed by WHO and or IADPSG criteria against adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes in untreated women. Only studies with universal application of a 75 g OGTT were included. Relative risks (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were obtained for each study. We combined study results using a random-effects model. Inconsistency across studies was defined by an inconsistency index (I2) > 50%. RESULTS: Data were extracted from eight studies, totaling 44,829 women. Greater risk of adverse outcomes was observed for both diagnostic criteria. When using the WHO criteria, consistent associations were seen for macrosomia (RR = 1.81; 95%CI 1.47-2.22; p < 0.001); large for gestational age (RR = 1.53; 95%CI 1.39-1.69; p < 0.001); perinatal mortality (RR = 1.55; 95% CI 0.88-2.73; p = 0.13); preeclampsia (RR = 1.69; 95%CI 1.31-2.18; p < 0.001); and cesarean delivery (RR = 1.37;95%CI 1.24-1.51; p < 0.001). Less data were available for the IADPSG criteria, and associations were inconsistent across studies (I2 ≥ 73%). Magnitudes of RRs and their 95%CIs were 1.73 (1.28-2.35; p = 0.001) for large for gestational age; 1.71 (1.38-2.13; p < 0.001) for preeclampsia; and 1.23 (1.01-1.51; p = 0.04) for cesarean delivery. Excluding either the HAPO or the EBDG studies minimally altered these associations, but the RRs seen for the IADPSG criteria were reduced after excluding HAPO. CONCLUSIONS: The WHO and the IADPSG criteria for GDM identified women at a small increased risk for adverse pregnancy outcomes. Associations were of similar magnitude for both criteria. However, high inconsistency was seen for those with the IADPSG criteria. Full evaluation of the latter in settings other than HAPO requires additional studies.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Gestacional/diagnóstico , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Resultado del Embarazo/epidemiología , Adolescente , Análisis de Varianza , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Humanos , Embarazo , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Organización Mundial de la SaludRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Gestational diabetes is one of the most common diseases during pregnancy. Despite this situation, there is still no consensus on methods for screening and diagnosis of this disease. OBJECTIVE: To assess perinatal outcomes of patients with gestational diabetes diagnosed using three different methods. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical observational, longitudinal, randomized trial at the National Institute of Perinatology Isidro Espinosa de los Reyes. We included all patients admitted to the Institute for a period of three months without pregestational diabetes. Patients were screened for gestational diabetes with an oral load of 50 g of glucose. Patients with a positive screen were randomized by a computer program that randomly chose patients and made a curve according to the criteria of the American Diabetes Association 75 g or 100 g and another group with 75 g according to the criteria of the World Health Organization. Patients with gestational diabetes were followed throughout pregnancy until its reclassification in the puerperium. RESULTS: Screening was performed in 863 patients and 87 were diagnosed with gestational diabetes. Perinatal outcomes were similar in patients with gestational diabetes diagnosed using different methods, but there was a higher frequency of pregnancy-induced hypertension in patients diagnosed with the curves of the American Diabetes Association 75 and 100 g compared with the curve of the World Health Organization. CONCLUSIONS: The American Diabetes Association diagnostic method as the World Health Organization are acceptable forms to diagnose gestational diabetes.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Gestacional/diagnóstico , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Resultado del Embarazo , Glucemia/análisis , Anomalías Congénitas/epidemiología , Diabetes Gestacional/epidemiología , Diabetes Gestacional/terapia , Femenino , Muerte Fetal/epidemiología , Macrosomía Fetal/epidemiología , Estudios de Seguimiento , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Hipertensión Inducida en el Embarazo/epidemiología , Tamizaje Masivo , México , Trabajo de Parto Prematuro/epidemiología , Embarazo , Embarazo Múltiple , Estudios Prospectivos , Mortinato/epidemiología , Estados Unidos , Agencias Voluntarias de Salud , Organización Mundial de la SaludRESUMEN
Beta-cell dysfunction and insulin resistance are interrelated metabolic abnormalities in the aetiology of Type 2 Diabetes. In several countries, increases in the prevalence of obesity and diabetes have been observed in association with the presence of insulin resistance. In this context, measurement of insulin resistance and beta-cell function is useful. The HOMA indexes (Homeostasis Model Assessment) have been widely used, representing an alternative for the evaluation of these parameters, particularly as a fast, easy and cheap method. This review discusses the origin and evolution of the HOMA index, as well as details of the method, analyzing features related to its validation and the cutoff limits for its interpretation.
Asunto(s)
Técnica de Clampeo de la Glucosa/métodos , Resistencia a la Insulina/fisiología , Células Secretoras de Insulina/fisiología , Insulina/sangre , Animales , Técnica de Clampeo de la Glucosa/normas , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Homeostasis , Humanos , Estudios de Validación como AsuntoRESUMEN
A disfunção das células-beta e a resistência insulínica são anormalidades metabólicas inter-relacionadas na etiologia do diabetes tipo 2. Em diversos países, tem sido observado o aumento da prevalência de obesidade e diabetes em associação com a presença da resistência insulínica. Nesse contexto, é útil a mensuração da resistência insulínica e da capacidade funcional das células-beta nos indivíduos. Os índices Homeostasis Model Assessment (HOMA) têm sido amplamente utilizados, representando uma das alternativas para avaliação desses parâmetros, principalmente por figurarem um método rápido, de fácil aplicação e de menor custo. Esta revisão discute sobre a origem e a evolução dos índices HOMA, bem como as particularidades do método, abordando aspectos relacionados à sua validação e aos pontos de corte existentes para sua interpretação.
Beta-cell dysfunction and insulin resistance are interrelated metabolic abnormalities in the aetiology of Type 2 Diabetes. In several countries, increases in the prevalence of obesity and diabetes have been observed in association with the presence of insulin resistance. In this context, measurement of insulin resistance and beta-cell function is useful. The HOMA indexes (Homeostasis Model Assessment) have been widely used, representing an alternative for the evaluation of these parameters, particularly as a fast, easy and cheap method. This review discusses the origin and evolution of the HOMA index, as well as details of the method, analyzing features related to its validation and the cutoff limits for its interpretation.
Asunto(s)
Animales , Humanos , Técnica de Clampeo de la Glucosa/métodos , Resistencia a la Insulina/fisiología , Células Secretoras de Insulina/fisiología , Insulina/sangre , Técnica de Clampeo de la Glucosa/normas , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Homeostasis , Estudios de Validación como AsuntoRESUMEN
Oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) is the most commonly used method to evaluate insulin resistance (IR) in the clinical practice. Our objective was to evaluate the diagnostic utility of fasting tests compared with OGTT tests in women with PCO, and the ability of fasting tests to detect postprandial hyperglycemia. One hundred fourteen women with PCO and 29 normal women were evaluated by a 2 hours OGTT. Fasting plasma insulin (INS) and glucose were measured during the test. GLU:INS ratio (r) (fasting glucose/fasting insulin), HOMA (homeostatic model assessment), QUICKI (quantitative insulin sensitivity check index) (fasting tests), as well as the AUCI (area under the curve of INS) and ISI composite (ISI) (insulin sensitivity index) (OGTT tests), were determined. A significant correlation between fasting tests and OGTT tests was found. Normal fasting tests with abnormal OGTT tests were found in 9 patients. No patient with fasting insulin levels less than 9.9 Ul/ml were IR, and all women with fasting insulin levels over 18.4 UI/ml were classified as having IR. We found glucose levels 120 min post glucose load (G 120) > or = 140 mg/dl in 14 patients (12.2%). Fasting glucose and insulin levels and the fasting tests, were poor predictors of impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and type 2 diabetes (DBT 2). Thus, fasting tests are useful in the diagnostic of IR in PCO patients. OGTT is necessary when the fasting insulin levels range between 9.9 and 18.4 Ul/ml. Women with PCO should undergo periodic screening for abnormal glucose tolerance.
Asunto(s)
Glucemia/análisis , Ayuno/fisiología , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Resistencia a la Insulina/fisiología , Insulina/sangre , Síndrome del Ovario Poliquístico/sangre , Adolescente , Adulto , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/sangre , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/diagnóstico , Femenino , Técnica de Clampeo de la Glucosa , Intolerancia a la Glucosa/sangre , Intolerancia a la Glucosa/diagnóstico , Homeostasis/fisiología , Humanos , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Valores de ReferenciaRESUMEN
El test de tolerancia oral a la glucosa (TTOG) es el más frecuentemente utilizado en la práctica clínica para el diagnóstico de resistencia insulínica (RI). El objetivo del presente trabajo fue la evaluación de la utilidad de los índices basales e índices TTOG, en mujeres con síndrome de ovario poliquístico (SOP) y del valor predictivo de los índices basales sobre la glucemia a los 120 minutos postprandial (G 120). Se estudiaron 114 pacientes con diagnóstico de SOP y 29 mujeres normales. A todas se les realizó un TTOG. Se dosó insulina y glucosa séricas cada 30 min durante las 2 horas del test y se determinaron los siguientes índices: Indices basales: GLU/lNS (glucemia en ayunas / insulinemia en ayunas), HOMA (modelo homeostático) y QUICKI (índice cuantitativo de sensibilidad insulínica) e índices TTOG: AI (área bajo la curva de insulina) e ISI composite (índice de sensibilidad insulínica). Se observaron correlaciones significativas entre los índices basales y los índices TTOG. Hubo 9 pruebas con índices basales normales que presentaban índice TTOG patológicos. Ninguna paciente con niveles de insulina menores a 9.9 Ul/ml presentó RI, mientras que todas las pacientes con niveles de insulina mayores a 18.4 Ul/ml tuvieron RI. Catorce pacientes (10.5%) presentaron G 120 ³ a 140 mg%. En 4 de los 14 casos (12.2%), los valores basales no hicieron sospechar la posibilidad del diagnóstico de hiperglucemia post prandial. En conclusión, en pacientes con SOP, los índices basales son útiles para diagnosticar RI. Proponemos realizar TTOG para diagnóstico de RI en aquellas pacientes que presenten insulinemias en ayunas entre 9.9 y 18.4 Ul/ml. En pacientes con SOP, se recomienda la evaluación periódica de la G 120. (AU)
Oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) is the most commonly used method to evaluate insulin resistance (IR) in the clinical practice. Our objective was to evaluate the diagnostic utility of fasting tests compared with OGTT tests in women with PCO, and the ability of fasting tests to detect postprandial hyperglycemia. One hundred fourteen women with PCO and 29 normal women were evaluated by a 2 hours OGTT. Fasting plasma insulin (INS) and glucose were measured during the test. GLU:INS ratio (r) (fasting glucose/fasting insulin), HOMA (homeostatic model assessment), QUICKI (quantitative insulin sensitivity check index) (fasting tests), as well as the AUCI (area under the curve of INS) and ISI composite (ISI) (insulin sensitivity index) (OGTT tests), were determined. A significant correlation between fasting tests and OGTT tests was found. Normal fasting tests with abnormal OGTT tests were found in 9 patients. No patient with fasting insulin levels less than 9.9 UI/ml were IR, and all women with fasting insulin levels over 18.4 UI/ml were classified as having IR. We found glucose levels 120 min post glucose load (G 120) ³ 140 mg/dl in 14 patients (12.2%). Fasting glucose and insulin levels and the fasting tests, were poor predictors of impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and type 2 diabetes (DBT 2). Thus, fasting tests are useful in the diagnostic of IR in PCO patients. OGTT is necessary when the fasting insulin levels range between 9.9 and 18.4 UI/ml. Women with PCO should undergo periodic screening for abnormal glucose tolerance. (AU)
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Femenino , Adolescente , Adulto , Insulina/sangre , Glucemia/análisis , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Resistencia a la Insulina/fisiología , Síndrome del Ovario Poliquístico/sangre , Ayuno/fisiología , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Homeostasis/fisiología , Valores de Referencia , Técnica de Clampeo de la Glucosa , Intolerancia a la Glucosa/sangre , Intolerancia a la Glucosa/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/sangre , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/diagnósticoRESUMEN
El test de tolerancia oral a la glucosa (TTOG) es el más frecuentemente utilizado en la práctica clínica para el diagnóstico de resistencia insulínica (RI). El objetivo del presente trabajo fue la evaluación de la utilidad de los índices basales e índices TTOG, en mujeres con síndrome de ovario poliquístico (SOP) y del valor predictivo de los índices basales sobre la glucemia a los 120 minutos postprandial (G 120). Se estudiaron 114 pacientes con diagnóstico de SOP y 29 mujeres normales. A todas se les realizó un TTOG. Se dosó insulina y glucosa séricas cada 30 min durante las 2 horas del test y se determinaron los siguientes índices: Indices basales: GLU/lNS (glucemia en ayunas / insulinemia en ayunas), HOMA (modelo homeostático) y QUICKI (índice cuantitativo de sensibilidad insulínica) e índices TTOG: AI (área bajo la curva de insulina) e ISI composite (índice de sensibilidad insulínica). Se observaron correlaciones significativas entre los índices basales y los índices TTOG. Hubo 9 pruebas con índices basales normales que presentaban índice TTOG patológicos. Ninguna paciente con niveles de insulina menores a 9.9 Ul/ml presentó RI, mientras que todas las pacientes con niveles de insulina mayores a 18.4 Ul/ml tuvieron RI. Catorce pacientes (10.5%) presentaron G 120 ³ a 140 mg%. En 4 de los 14 casos (12.2%), los valores basales no hicieron sospechar la posibilidad del diagnóstico de hiperglucemia post prandial. En conclusión, en pacientes con SOP, los índices basales son útiles para diagnosticar RI. Proponemos realizar TTOG para diagnóstico de RI en aquellas pacientes que presenten insulinemias en ayunas entre 9.9 y 18.4 Ul/ml. En pacientes con SOP, se recomienda la evaluación periódica de la G 120.
Oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) is the most commonly used method to evaluate insulin resistance (IR) in the clinical practice. Our objective was to evaluate the diagnostic utility of fasting tests compared with OGTT tests in women with PCO, and the ability of fasting tests to detect postprandial hyperglycemia. One hundred fourteen women with PCO and 29 normal women were evaluated by a 2 hours OGTT. Fasting plasma insulin (INS) and glucose were measured during the test. GLU:INS ratio (r) (fasting glucose/fasting insulin), HOMA (homeostatic model assessment), QUICKI (quantitative insulin sensitivity check index) (fasting tests), as well as the AUCI (area under the curve of INS) and ISI composite (ISI) (insulin sensitivity index) (OGTT tests), were determined. A significant correlation between fasting tests and OGTT tests was found. Normal fasting tests with abnormal OGTT tests were found in 9 patients. No patient with fasting insulin levels less than 9.9 UI/ml were IR, and all women with fasting insulin levels over 18.4 UI/ml were classified as having IR. We found glucose levels 120 min post glucose load (G 120) ³ 140 mg/dl in 14 patients (12.2%). Fasting glucose and insulin levels and the fasting tests, were poor predictors of impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and type 2 diabetes (DBT 2). Thus, fasting tests are useful in the diagnostic of IR in PCO patients. OGTT is necessary when the fasting insulin levels range between 9.9 and 18.4 UI/ml. Women with PCO should undergo periodic screening for abnormal glucose tolerance.
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Femenino , Adolescente , Adulto , Glucemia/análisis , Ayuno/fisiología , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Resistencia a la Insulina/fisiología , Insulina/sangre , Síndrome del Ovario Poliquístico/sangre , /sangre , /diagnóstico , Técnica de Clampeo de la Glucosa , Intolerancia a la Glucosa/sangre , Intolerancia a la Glucosa/diagnóstico , Homeostasis/fisiología , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Valores de ReferenciaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Evidence is provided to clinicians and decision makers on the validity of ADA and WHO tests based on NDDG criteria for gestational diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During 18 months, all pregnant women attending a University Hospital underwent a 50-g, 1-h NDDG GCT for universal screening (n = 1092). The following appointment consisted of a 75-g, 2-h GTT (WHO test), independently of the prior result. Women with an abnormal 50-g and/or an abnormal 75-g, received a 100-g, 3-h GTT; subjects with only one abnormal 3-h GTT value were not included in the accuracy analysis. Women whose diagnosis followed NDDG criteria received treatment. Obstetricians were not aware of ADA/WHO results. RESULTS: ADA sensitivity was 100% (95%CI 98.6, 100) and specificity, 98.1% (95%CI 97.6, 98.6), whereas WHO sensitivity was 57.6% (95%CI 55.9, 59.2) and specificity, 85.1% (95%CI 84.7, 85.6). ADA results remained similar independently of obesity and age, but performed better with a family history of diabetes. Accuracy of WHO improved under selective screening, still the false negative rate ranged 40-56%. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend replicating this validation process in other health service settings. Although WHO test is easier and less expensive than NDDG or ADA, caution is needed before deciding employment of such criteria in pregnant women.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Gestacional/diagnóstico , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Organización Mundial de la Salud , Diabetes Gestacional/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , México/epidemiología , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Embarazo , Prevalencia , Estándares de Referencia , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Sensibilidad y EspecificidadRESUMEN
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Lack of consensus about which screening tests to use for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and difficulties in performing the gold-standard diagnostic test, the 100-g glucose tolerance test (100-g GTT), justify comparison with alternatives. The aim was to compare this with two other screening tests: combined fasting glucose with risk factors (FG + RF) and 50-g GTT. DESIGN AND SETTING: Prospective longitudinal cohort study in the Hospital School of Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul. METHODS: The three tests were performed independently on 341 pregnant women. Sensitivity (S), specificity (Sp), positive (PPV) and negative (NPV) predictive values, positive (PLR) and negative (NLR) likelihood ratios, and false-positive (FP) and false-negative (FR) rates obtained with FG + RF and 50-g GTT were compared with values from 100-g GTT. The average one-hour post-intake glucose levels (1hPG) with 50-g and 100-g were compared. Students t test was used in the statistical analysis. RESULTS: FG + RF led more pregnant women (53.9%) to diagnostic confirmation than did 50-g GTT (14.4%). The tests were equivalent for S (86.4 and 76.9%), PPV (98.7 and 98.9%), NLR (0.3 and 0.27) and FR (15.4 and 23.1%). Average 1hPG values were similar: 50-g GTT = 106.8 mg/dl and 100-g GTT = 107.5 mg/dl. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic efficiency with simplicity, practicality and low cost make FG + RF more appropriate for screening for GDM. The equivalence of 1hPG allows a new, cheaper and less uncomfortable protocol to be proposed for screening and diagnosing GDM.
Asunto(s)
Glucemia/análisis , Diabetes Gestacional/diagnóstico , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Tamizaje Masivo , Adulto , Diabetes Gestacional/economía , Métodos Epidemiológicos , Ayuno/sangre , Femenino , Humanos , Programas Nacionales de Salud/economía , EmbarazoRESUMEN
CONTEXTO E OBJETIVO: A falta de consenso sobre os protocolos de rastreamento e diagnóstico do diabetes gestacional, associada às dificuldades na realização do teste oral simplificado do diabete gestacional (o teste de tolerância a 100 g de glicose, considerado padrão-ouro) justificam a comparação com alternativas. O objetivo deste trabalho é comparar o teste padrão-ouro a dois testes de rastreamento: associação de glicemia de jejum e fatores de risco (GJ + FR) e o teste oral simplificado de tolerância a 50 g de glicose (TTG 50 g), com o teste de tolerância a 100 g de glicose (TTG 100 g).TIPO DE ESTUDO E LOCAL: Estudo de coorte longitudinal, prospectivo, realizado no Serviço de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia do Hospital Universitário da Universidade Federal de Mato Grosso do Sul. MÉTODOS: 341 gestantes foram submetidas aos três testes. Calcularam-se os índices de sensibilidade (S), especificidade (E), valores preditivos (VPP e VPN), razões de probabilidade (RPP e RPN) e resultados falsos (FP e FN), positivos e negativos da associação GJ + FR e do TTG 50 g em relação ao TTG 100 g. Compararam-se as médias das glicemias de uma hora pós-sobrecarga (1hPS) com 50 e 100 g. Na análise estatística, empregou-se o teste t de Student, com limite de significância de 5%. RESULTADOS: A associação GJ + FR encaminhou mais gestantes (53,9%) para a confirmação diagnóstica que o TTG 50 g (14,4%). Os dois testes foram equivalentes nos índices de S (86,4 e 76,9%), VPN (98,7 e 98,9%), RPN (0,3 e 0,27) e FN (15,4 e 23,1%). As médias das glicemias 1hPS foram semelhantes, 106,8 mg/dl para o TTG 50 g e 107,5 mg/dl para o TTG 100 g. CONCLUSÕES: Os resultados da eficiência diagnóstica associados à simplicidade, praticabilidade e custo referendaram a associação GJ + FR como o mais adequado para o rastreamento. A equivalência das glicemias de 1hPS permitiram a proposição de um novo protocolo de rastreamento e diagnóstico do diabete gestacional, com menores custo e desconforto.
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Femenino , Adulto , Diabetes Gestacional/diagnóstico , Glucemia/análisis , Tamizaje Masivo , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Diabetes Gestacional/economía , Embarazo , Ayuno/sangre , Métodos Epidemiológicos , Programas Nacionales de Salud/economíaRESUMEN
The gold standard for quantifying insulin sensitivity (IS) is the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (Clamp) with a cut-off point of 5x10-2 (dL/min)/(microU/mL) or less to indicate insulin resistance. Bergman's minimal model (Min-Mod) is also being used to estimate IS, but there are doubts as to its equivalence with Clamp. The objective of the present study is to determine if Clamp and the tolbutamide and insulin techniques of Min-Mod are equivalent. Meta-analysis based on a bibliographic search from 1970 until the present was made for the MeSH terms: insulin resistance, hyperglycemic-clamp, euglycemic-clamp, Min-Mod, minimal model approach. Concordance was determined with both simple and intraclass correlation and Bland and Altman's concordance limits using R. Three of the 109 articles found were included. The concordance limits indicate that Clamp and Min-Mod are not equivalent, which could result in diagnostic errors if the accepted cut-off point is used for both methods. Given this lack of equivalence, a ROC analysis was performed and new diagnostic cut-off points of 2.4 and 4.6x0-2 (dL/min)/(microU/mL) for insulin and tolbutamide techniques of Min-Mod, respectively, are proposed, with adequate sensitivity, specificity, and predictive value. These values should be prospectively validated.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/métodos , Glucosa , Resistencia a la Insulina/fisiología , Insulina/sangre , Glucemia/metabolismo , Diabetes Mellitus/sangre , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Humanos , Hipoglucemiantes , Curva ROC , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , TolbutamidaRESUMEN
Os critérios diagnósticos dos distúrbios do metabolismo de glicose foram estabelecidos pela Organizaçäo Mundial de Saúde (OMS)/National Diabetes Data Group (NDDG) no início da década de 1980. Em 1997, a American Diabetes Association (ADA) sugeriu novos critérios diagnósticos, baseados na interpretaçäo da glicemia de jejum. Neste estudo, 56 indivíduos foram submetidos ao teste de tolerância à glicose oral (oGTT) (75g) e aplicamos ambos os critérios diagnósticos para estimar a prevalência de distúrbios de metabolismo de glicose. Dos 56 indivíduos, 11 (19,6 % - grupo 1) foram considerados intolerantes pelos critérios da OMS/NDDG e seis (10,7 % - grupo 2), como glicemia de jejum alterada (GJA) pelos novos critérios da ADA. Comparamos variáveis clínicas e bioquímicas (idade, índice de massa corporal, pico de insulina durante o oGTT, área sob a curva de insulina durante o oGTT e concentrações séricas basais da proteína carreadora dos fatores de crescimento insulina-símiles 1 (IGFBP-1) entre ambos os grupos, näo observando diferença significativa em nenhuma das variáveis (43 ± 13 x 46 ± 4,4 anos, 29,5 ± 3,2 x 27,2 ± 2,6kg/m², 153,7 ± 100,7 x 171,3 ± 145,6µUI/ml, 12.040 ± 8.488 x 13.970 ± 12.170 e 14,4 ± 9,3 x 19,4 ± 11,8ng/ml, respectivamente, p = NS). Entretanto, quando comparamos estas mesmas variáveis entre o grupo de indivíduos considerados normais pelos critérios da ADA e intolerantes pelos critérios da OMS/NDDG (n = 8, grupo 3) e o grupo de indivíduos considerados normais por ambos os critérios (n = 42, grupo 4), observamos que näo houve também diferença em relaçäo à idade (42 ± 15 x 38 ± 10 anos, respectivamente, NS); entretanto o grupo 3 apresenta índice de massa corporal (IMC) (29,5 ± 3,9 x 24,5 ± 3,5kg/m², respectivamente, p < 0,02), pico de insulina durante o oGTT (115,2 ± 29,1 x 84,4 ± 56,5µUI/ml, respectivamente, p < 0,02) e área sob a curva de insulina durante o oGTT (9.112 ± 2.323 x 6.649 ± 4.438, respectivamente, p < 0,007) com valores médios superiores ao grupo 4. O grupo 3 apresentou ainda concentrações séricas basais de IGFBP-1 com valores em média inferiores ao grupo 4 (14,9 ± 10,1 x 28,9 ± 17,6ng/ml, respectivamente, p < 0,03)
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Persona de Mediana Edad , Glucemia , Diabetes Mellitus , Sociedades Médicas , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Organización Mundial de la SaludRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To study the concordance between the 1997 American Diabetes Association (ADA) impaired fasting glucose (IFG) category with the World Health Organization (WHO) impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) status in a population with a high prevalence of diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We analyzed the oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) carried out at the Instituto Nacional de la Nutrición Salvador Zubiran (INNSZ) central laboratory from June to December 1997. We included patients with fasting plasma glucose (FPG) between 60 and 160 mg/dl. The results from the glucose tolerance test were selected as the gold standard. RESULTS: Among the 1,802 glucose tolerance test results available for analysis, 1,706 fulfilled the requirements to be included. Diabetes and IGT were remarkably more frequently diagnosed when the WHO criteria were applied. The new ADA criteria failed to diagnose 69% of WHO diabetic patients and the vast majority of WHO glucose-intolerant subjects. Using the new criteria, 82% were considered normal. Of the IFG subjects, 39% were classified as diabetic and 23% were normal according to the 2-h postchallenge glucose values. Only 37% of the IFG patients were, in fact, glucose intolerant according to the WHO criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Our results clearly show that the 1997 ADA criteria are less sensitive for diagnosing diabetes than OGTT-based WHO criteria. Even more important, there is poor agreement between the WHO category of IGT and the ADA category of IFG.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Agencias Voluntarias de Salud/normas , Organización Mundial de la Salud , Adulto , Estudios Transversales , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Ayuno , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Prevalencia , Estándares de Referencia , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare the prevalence of different categories of glucose tolerance in a Japanese-Brazihan population using World Health Organization (WHO) and American Diabetes Association (ADA) diagnostic criteria. RESEARCH DIVISION AND METHODS: The analyses were based on the data obtained from a study conducted in a representative sample of the Japanese-Brazilian population composed of 647 subjects (40-79 years) who were submitted to a 2-h oral glucose tolerance test. Prevalence of glucose tolerance categories and the level of agreement (K statistics) were obtained using WHO and ADA criteria. Cardiovascular risk profile of the subjects with different diagnostic categories were compared. RESULTS: Similar prevalences of diabetes were found considering both criteria (WHO, 20.3%; ADA, 19.2%). The prevalence of impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) by WHO criteria was 14.7%, contrasting with 7.4% of impaired fasting glucose (IFG) by ADA criteria. Subjects with discordant diagnostic categories by the criteria, considered at risk for diabetes (IGT/IFG), showed a worse metabolic profile than the concordant normal subjects. However, subjects with discordant diagnoses who had IGT or diabetes by WHO criteria but who were normal by ADA criteria exhibited a higher number of cardiovascular risk factors (higher blood pressure and triglyceride and low HDL cholesterol) than those who were discordant (IFG/diabetes) by ADA criteria but normal by WHO criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Although the number of diabetic subjects was similar between the criteria, those identified as being at risk for diabetes were quite distinct. Fewer subjects were classified as having IFG by ADA criteria than as having IGT by WHO criteria. Abnormal glucose tolerance based on WHO criteria seems to identify a worse cardiovascular profile than abnormal tolerance based on ADA criteria. Follow-up studies are necessary to know the prognostic significance of IFG to predict subsequent diabetes.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Prueba de Tolerancia a la Glucosa/normas , Agencias Voluntarias de Salud/normas , Organización Mundial de la Salud , Adulto , Anciano , Brasil/epidemiología , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/epidemiología , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/etiología , Femenino , Humanos , Japón/etnología , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Vigilancia de la Población , Prevalencia , Estándares de Referencia , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
Ambient temperature may affect venous glucose concentration after glucose tolerance tests. We analysed 1030 standardised 75 g tests. Although mean fasting values did not differ, post-load values did: adjusted mean 2 h glucose concentration was 1.03 mmol/L lower at lower (5-14 degrees C) than at higher (25-31 degrees C) temperatures (p < 0.001). The occurrence of abnormal glucose tolerance doubled on warmer days. The diagnostic accuracy of the glucose tolerance test showed clinically significant temperature-associated variation. These variations, if confirmed, call for temperature standardisation during glucose tolerance testing and/or alternative strategies for use when standardisation is not feasible.