2小时口服糖耐量试验和血红蛋白A1C在不孕和复发性流产妇女糖尿病前期鉴别中的比较。

Alice J Shapiro, Emily C Holden, Peter G McGovern, Donald Alderson, Sara S Morelli
{"title":"2小时口服糖耐量试验和血红蛋白A1C在不孕和复发性流产妇女糖尿病前期鉴别中的比较。","authors":"Alice J Shapiro,&nbsp;Emily C Holden,&nbsp;Peter G McGovern,&nbsp;Donald Alderson,&nbsp;Sara S Morelli","doi":"10.1177/1179558119831280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Research question: </strong>Does hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) predict pre-diabetes (pre-DM) in a population of women with infertility and/or recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL), when considering the 75 g, 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (2h GTT) as the gold standard?</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective study of 242 patients with infertility or RPL presenting to a university-affiliated reproductive endocrinology and infertility clinic between January 2012 and December 2016 who underwent screening for disorders of glucose metabolism with a 2h GTT. The prevalence of pre-DM as defined by HbA1C 5.7% to 6.4% and 2h GTT values of 140-199 mg/dL, and predictive values of HbA1C for the identification of pre-DM when compared with 2h GTT, were calculated and compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 242 patients, 188 (77.7%) women had both HbA1C and 2h GTT performed. Of these, 89 (47.3%) tested positive for pre-DM by one or both methods. Of 89 patients, 14 (15.7%) had both an abnormal 2h GTT and an abnormal HbA1C. Only 6 out of 89 (6.7%) patients tested positive for pre-DM by an abnormal 2h GTT in the setting of a normal HbA1C result. Conversely, 69 of these 89 patients (77.5%) tested positive for pre-DM by an abnormal HbA1C in the setting of a normal 2h GTT. The prevalence of pre-DM, as defined by 2h GTT, was 10.6% (20/188) (95% CI, 6.6-16.0), compared with a prevalence of 44.1% (83/188) (95% CI, 36.9-51.6) when pre-DM was defined by HbA1C alone. When the 2h GTT was considered the gold standard for the identification of pre-DM, the negative predictive value (NPV) of HbA1C compared with 2h GTT was 94.3% (95% CI, 88.0-97.9), whereas the positive predictive value (PPV) of HbA1C compared with 2h GTT was only 16.9% (95% CI, 9.5-26.7).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although a normal HbA1C was highly predictive of a normal 2h GTT, the two tests demonstrate poor agreement in the identification of pre-DM in women with infertility and/or RPL. Hemoglobin A1C is superior to the 2h GTT as an initial screening test for pre-DM in this population, since it identified a substantial number of women who would otherwise remain undiagnosed in the setting for a normal 2h GTT alone. However, the long-term clinical relevance of an elevated HbA1C in this population needs to be better defined.</p>","PeriodicalId":44130,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Medicine Insights-Reproductive Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1179558119831280","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of 2-Hour Oral Glucose Tolerance Test and Hemoglobin A1C in the Identification of Pre-Diabetes in Women with Infertility and Recurrent Pregnancy Loss.\",\"authors\":\"Alice J Shapiro,&nbsp;Emily C Holden,&nbsp;Peter G McGovern,&nbsp;Donald Alderson,&nbsp;Sara S Morelli\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1179558119831280\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Research question: </strong>Does hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) predict pre-diabetes (pre-DM) in a population of women with infertility and/or recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL), when considering the 75 g, 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (2h GTT) as the gold standard?</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective study of 242 patients with infertility or RPL presenting to a university-affiliated reproductive endocrinology and infertility clinic between January 2012 and December 2016 who underwent screening for disorders of glucose metabolism with a 2h GTT. The prevalence of pre-DM as defined by HbA1C 5.7% to 6.4% and 2h GTT values of 140-199 mg/dL, and predictive values of HbA1C for the identification of pre-DM when compared with 2h GTT, were calculated and compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 242 patients, 188 (77.7%) women had both HbA1C and 2h GTT performed. Of these, 89 (47.3%) tested positive for pre-DM by one or both methods. Of 89 patients, 14 (15.7%) had both an abnormal 2h GTT and an abnormal HbA1C. Only 6 out of 89 (6.7%) patients tested positive for pre-DM by an abnormal 2h GTT in the setting of a normal HbA1C result. Conversely, 69 of these 89 patients (77.5%) tested positive for pre-DM by an abnormal HbA1C in the setting of a normal 2h GTT. The prevalence of pre-DM, as defined by 2h GTT, was 10.6% (20/188) (95% CI, 6.6-16.0), compared with a prevalence of 44.1% (83/188) (95% CI, 36.9-51.6) when pre-DM was defined by HbA1C alone. When the 2h GTT was considered the gold standard for the identification of pre-DM, the negative predictive value (NPV) of HbA1C compared with 2h GTT was 94.3% (95% CI, 88.0-97.9), whereas the positive predictive value (PPV) of HbA1C compared with 2h GTT was only 16.9% (95% CI, 9.5-26.7).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although a normal HbA1C was highly predictive of a normal 2h GTT, the two tests demonstrate poor agreement in the identification of pre-DM in women with infertility and/or RPL. Hemoglobin A1C is superior to the 2h GTT as an initial screening test for pre-DM in this population, since it identified a substantial number of women who would otherwise remain undiagnosed in the setting for a normal 2h GTT alone. However, the long-term clinical relevance of an elevated HbA1C in this population needs to be better defined.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44130,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Medicine Insights-Reproductive Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1179558119831280\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Medicine Insights-Reproductive Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1179558119831280\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Medicine Insights-Reproductive Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1179558119831280","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

研究问题:当考虑75 g、 2小时口服葡萄糖耐量试验(2小时GTT)作为金标准?设计:对2012年1月至2016年12月期间在大学附属生殖内分泌和不孕不育诊所就诊的242名不孕或RPL患者进行回顾性研究,这些患者接受了2小时GTT的糖代谢障碍筛查。糖尿病前期的患病率由HbA1C定义为5.7%-6.4%,2h GTT值为140-199 mg/dL,以及当与2h GTT相比时HbA1C用于识别糖尿病前期的预测值,进行计算和比较。结果:242例患者中188例(77.7%)同时进行HbA1C和2h GTT。其中,89人(47.3%)通过一种或两种方法检测出糖尿病前期呈阳性。在89例患者中,14例(15.7%)同时存在2h GTT异常和HbA1C异常。在HbA1C结果正常的情况下,89名患者中只有6名(6.7%)通过异常的2小时GTT检测出糖尿病前期阳性。相反,在这89名患者中,有69名(77.5%)在正常的2小时GTT条件下通过异常HbA1C检测出糖尿病前期阳性。根据2小时GTT的定义,糖尿病前期的患病率为10.6%(20/188)(95%CI,6.6-16.0),而当糖尿病前期仅由HbA1C定义时,患病率为44.1%(83/188)(95%CI,36.9-51.6)。当2h GTT被认为是鉴定糖尿病前期的金标准时,HbA1C与2h GTT相比的阴性预测值(NPV)为94.3%(95%CI,88.0-97.9),而HbA1C相对于2h GTT的阳性预测值(PPV)仅为16.9%(95%CI,9.5-26.7),这两项测试表明,在不孕和/或RPL妇女中识别糖尿病前期的一致性较差。在该人群中,血红蛋白A1C优于2小时GTT作为糖尿病前期的初步筛查测试,因为它确定了大量女性,否则在单独进行正常2小时GTT的情况下仍无法确诊。然而,需要更好地确定该人群中HbA1C升高的长期临床相关性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Comparison of 2-Hour Oral Glucose Tolerance Test and Hemoglobin A1C in the Identification of Pre-Diabetes in Women with Infertility and Recurrent Pregnancy Loss.

Research question: Does hemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) predict pre-diabetes (pre-DM) in a population of women with infertility and/or recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL), when considering the 75 g, 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (2h GTT) as the gold standard?

Design: Retrospective study of 242 patients with infertility or RPL presenting to a university-affiliated reproductive endocrinology and infertility clinic between January 2012 and December 2016 who underwent screening for disorders of glucose metabolism with a 2h GTT. The prevalence of pre-DM as defined by HbA1C 5.7% to 6.4% and 2h GTT values of 140-199 mg/dL, and predictive values of HbA1C for the identification of pre-DM when compared with 2h GTT, were calculated and compared.

Results: Of 242 patients, 188 (77.7%) women had both HbA1C and 2h GTT performed. Of these, 89 (47.3%) tested positive for pre-DM by one or both methods. Of 89 patients, 14 (15.7%) had both an abnormal 2h GTT and an abnormal HbA1C. Only 6 out of 89 (6.7%) patients tested positive for pre-DM by an abnormal 2h GTT in the setting of a normal HbA1C result. Conversely, 69 of these 89 patients (77.5%) tested positive for pre-DM by an abnormal HbA1C in the setting of a normal 2h GTT. The prevalence of pre-DM, as defined by 2h GTT, was 10.6% (20/188) (95% CI, 6.6-16.0), compared with a prevalence of 44.1% (83/188) (95% CI, 36.9-51.6) when pre-DM was defined by HbA1C alone. When the 2h GTT was considered the gold standard for the identification of pre-DM, the negative predictive value (NPV) of HbA1C compared with 2h GTT was 94.3% (95% CI, 88.0-97.9), whereas the positive predictive value (PPV) of HbA1C compared with 2h GTT was only 16.9% (95% CI, 9.5-26.7).

Conclusions: Although a normal HbA1C was highly predictive of a normal 2h GTT, the two tests demonstrate poor agreement in the identification of pre-DM in women with infertility and/or RPL. Hemoglobin A1C is superior to the 2h GTT as an initial screening test for pre-DM in this population, since it identified a substantial number of women who would otherwise remain undiagnosed in the setting for a normal 2h GTT alone. However, the long-term clinical relevance of an elevated HbA1C in this population needs to be better defined.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Medicine Insights: Reproductive Health is a peer reviewed; open access journal, which covers all aspects of Reproduction: Gynecology, Obstetrics, and Infertility, spanning both male and female issues, from the physical to the psychological and the social, including: sex, contraception, pregnancy, childbirth, and related topics such as social and emotional impacts. It welcomes original research and review articles from across the health sciences. Clinical subjects include fertility and sterility, infertility and assisted reproduction, IVF, fertility preservation despite gonadotoxic chemo- and/or radiotherapy, pregnancy problems, PPD, infections and disease, surgery, diagnosis, menopause, HRT, pelvic floor problems, reproductive cancers and environmental impacts on reproduction, although this list is by no means exhaustive Subjects covered include, but are not limited to: • fertility and sterility, • infertility and ART, • ART/IVF, • fertility preservation despite gonadotoxic chemo- and/or radiotherapy, • pregnancy problems, • Postpartum depression • Infections and disease, • Gyn/Ob surgery, • diagnosis, • Contraception • Premenstrual tension • Gynecologic Oncology • reproductive cancers • environmental impacts on reproduction, • Obstetrics/Gynaecology • Women''s Health • menopause, • HRT, • pelvic floor problems, • Paediatric and adolescent gynaecology • PID
期刊最新文献
Fertility Treatment Options for Women With Polycystic Ovary Syndrome. Techniques of Cryopreservation for Ovarian Tissue and Whole Ovary. An Exploratory Analysis of Factors Associated With Interest in Postpartum Intrauterine Device Uptake Among Pregnant Women and Couples in Kigali, Rwanda. Setting Up a Cryopreservation Programme for Immature Testicular Tissue: Lessons Learned After More Than 15 Years of Experience The Source of Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1