Diabetes Care
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kousta, E.
Right arrow Articles by McCarthy, M. I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kousta, E.
Right arrow Articles by McCarthy, M. I.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Diabetes Care, Vol 22, Issue 6 933-937, Copyright © 1999 by American Diabetes Association


ARTICLES

Implications of new diagnostic criteria for abnormal glucose homeostasis in women with previous gestational diabetes

E Kousta, NJ Lawrence, A Penny, BA Millauer, S Robinson, A Dornhorst, M de Swiet, PJ Steer, A Grenfell, HM Mather, DG Johnston and MI McCarthy
Section of Endocrinology and Metabolic Medicine, Imperial College School of Medicine at St. Mary's Hospital, London, U.K. e.kousta@ic.ac.uk

OBJECTIVE: To determine the consequences of applying revised American Diabetes Association (ADA) (1997) and World Health Organization (WHO) (1998) recommendations for the classification of glucose intolerance in women with previous gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: There were 192 women with previous GDM who took an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) 1-86 months after delivery and were classified by WHO (1985), ADA (1997, fasting glucose), and revised WHO (1998) guidelines. RESULTS: Among the 165 women without a preexisting diagnosis of diabetes, WHO-1985 and ADA-1997 provided similar estimates of diabetes prevalence (13.3% vs. 11.5%) but widely differing estimates of impaired glucose homeostasis (31.5% impaired glucose tolerance [IGT] by WHO-1985 vs. 10.9% impaired fasting glucose by ADA-1997 criteria). Overall, 56 women (34%) showed a classification discrepancy between WHO-1985 and ADA-1997 criteria, including 44 with normal fasting glucose by ADA-1997 criteria, but abnormal 2-h glucose by WHO-1985 criteria (40 IGT, 4 diabetes). The cardiovascular risk profile of these women was more favorable than that of 18 women with impaired fasting glucose. WHO-1998 recommendations reproduced ADA-1997 findings when used as a fasting screen, but behaved similarly to WHO-1985 criteria when 2-h glucose values were also analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: All criteria produced similar estimates of diabetes prevalence. However, analyses based on a single fasting glucose screen (and a threshold of 6.1 mmol/l) failed to identify 60% of women with abnormal 2-h glucose levels. Screening women with previous GDM (and by analogy, other groups at high risk of diabetes) with a single fasting glucose has low sensitivity for the detection of abnormal glucose tolerance. Recent guidelines recommending this approach require reevaluation.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Diabetes Diabetes Care Clinical Diabetes Diabetes Spectrum
Copyright © 1999 by the American Diabetes Association.