Display options
Share it on

Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2021 Nov 26;183:109156. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2021.109156. Epub 2021 Nov 26.

Saving time by replacing the standardised two-hour oral glucose tolerance test with a one-hour test: Validation of a new screening algorithm in patients with coronary artery disease from the ESC-EORP EUROASPIRE V registry.

Diabetes research and clinical practice

Giulia Ferrannini, Dirk De Bacquer, Viveca Gyberg, Guy De Backer, Kornelia Kotseva, Linda G Mellbin, Rebecca Risebrink, Jaakko Tuomilehto, David Wood, Lars Rydén

Affiliations

  1. Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. Electronic address: [email protected].
  2. Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
  3. Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
  4. National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, UK; St Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UK.
  5. Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Heart and Vascular Theme, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
  6. Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland; Diabetes Research Group, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia; Department of Public Health, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
  7. National Institute for Prevention and Cardiovascular Health, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland.

PMID: 34843858 DOI: 10.1016/j.diabres.2021.109156

Abstract

AIMS: An oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) combining fasting (FPG) and 2-hour plasma glucose (2hPG) is the most sensitive method for detecting type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Since it is considered time-consuming, we aim at validating a previously proposed screening algorithm based on a 1-hour plasma glucose (1hPG) with a 12 mmol/L threshold.

METHODS: Nine-hundred-eighteen patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) without known T2DM from the EUROASPIRE V cross-sectional survey underwent an OGTT. The reference for T2DM was 2hPG ≥ 11.1 mmol/L. T2DM diagnosis by HbA1c ≥ 6.5%(48 mmol/mol), FPG ≥ 7.0 mmol/L, and 1hPG ≥ 12 mmol/L were compared with the outcome of 2hPG.

RESULTS: Mean FPG, HbA1c and 2hPG were 6.1 mmol/L, 5.6%(38 mmol/mol) and 7.8 mmol/L respectively. Ninety-six patients (10%) were diagnosed with T2DM according to 2hPG. Using this definition, in the group with FPG < 6.5 mmol/L and 1hPG < 12 only 5 (1%) were misdiagnosed as false negatives. All patients with a FPG > 8.0 mmol/L and 1hPG > 15.0 mmol/L were identified as having T2DM. According to the algorithm, in 79% of patients T2DM could be excluded by combining FPG < 6.5 mmol/L and 1hPG < 12 mmol/L.

CONCLUSIONS: T2DM Screening by means of an algorithm combining FPG and 1hPG limits the demand of a 2hOGTT in 79% of CAD patients without known T2DM. HbA1c did not add to the information derived from this algorithm.

Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Keywords: Coronary Artery Disease; Diagnosis; Ischemic Heart Disease; OGTT; Prevention; Screening; Survey

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this pa

Publication Types