RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effect of applying alternative diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) during the COVID-19 pandemic on GDM prevalence and obstetrical and perinatal outcomes, in comparison to usual diagnostic approaches. METHODS: Data from women referred to GDM diagnosis from 1 September to 30 November 2019 were retrospectively collected (2019-group). The same data from the same period in 2020 were prospectively collected (2020-group). In both cases, a two-step diagnostic approach was used, the first step being a screening test (1 h 50 goral glucose tolerance test, OGTT). In 2019 it was followed by a 100 gr OGTT for diagnosis. In 2020, this was replaced by a blood test for the measurement of plasma glucose and HbA1c, according to alternative GDM diagnostic criteria during the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: From 237 women in the 2019 group, 40 (16.9%) were diagnosed with GDM, while from 255 women in the 2020 group, 37 (14.5%) had GDM (p = 0.470). More women in the 2020 group, in comparison to the 2019 group, were nulligravid (41.9% vs. 47.2%, p = 0.013), had a personal history of GDM (11.4% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.013) and had macrosomia in previous pregnancies (10.2% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.001). Obstetrical and perinatal outcomes were similar when comparing women with GDM to non-GDM women in the 2019 and 2020 groups and between GDM women and non-GDM women. CONCLUSION: In a Spanish population, GDM prevalence during the COVID-19 pandemic using the alternative diagnostic criteria was similar to that found in 2019 using the usual diagnostic criteria. Despite women referred for GDM diagnosis during the pandemic having more GDM risk factors, obstetrical and perinatal outcomes were comparable to those observed before the pandemic.
RESUMO
Introducción y objetivos. La homocisteína se relaciona con enfermedad vascular, alteraciones del estado nutricional y detección de homocistinuria en neonatos, entre otras enfermedades. Debido a la importancia de su determinación, han aparecido diferentes métodos de cuantificación; el objeto de este trabajo es evaluar el método inmunonefelométrico del aparato BN II (Dade Behring). Material y método. Se realizó una comparación entre 2 métodos de cuantificación: el inmunoanálisis competitivo (IMMULITE 2000, DPC) y el análisis nefelométrico (BN II, Dade Behring), para lo cual se compararon los resultados de 74 muestras, además de determinar la imprecisión intraserial, imprecisión interdiaria, el límite de detección, el límite de cuantificación y el valor crítico del método inmunonefelométrico del BN II de Dade Behring. Resultados. La comparación entre ambos métodos mostró una buena correlación entre el inmunoanálisis competitivo, IMMULITE 2000 de DPC y el análisis nefelométrico, BN II de Dade Behring (Y = 1,4825 + 0,8342X). El valor crítico obtenido fue de 5,46 mmol/l y el límite de detección, de 5,77 mmol/l. La imprecisión intraserial fue inferior al 5% (3,65-4,66%). Conclusiones. El análisis nefelométrico (BN II, Dade Behring) ha demostrado cumplir todos los requisitos técnicos necesarios para su validación como método para la determinación de la homocisteína(AU)
Introduction. The homocysteine is associated with vascular diseases, alterations in the nutritional states, homocystinuria detection in neonates, as well as other diseases. Due to the importance of its determination, different measurement methods have been developed. The aim of this work is to evaluate the imunonephelometric method used in the Dade Behring BN II Nephelometer system. Material and method. We present a comparison between 2 methods: a competitive inmunoassay (IMMULITE 2000, DPC) and the nephelometric test (BN II, Dade Behring). For the determination of within batch and between-day imprecision, 74 samples were analysed and compared. Results. The detection and quantification limits, and the critical value of the inmunonephelometric method, were also determined. Both methods showed good correlations (Y = 1.4825 + 0.8342X). We also obtained a critical value of 5.46 mmol/L and the detection limit was 5.77 mmol/L. Within batch imprecision was below 5 % (3.65-4.66%). Conclusions. The nephelometric test (Dade Behring BN II System) has demonstrated to fulfill all the technical requirements needed for its validation as a method for the determination of homocysteine(AU)
