Suppr超能文献

降低空腹血糖受损标准对胰岛素抵抗个体识别的影响。GISIR数据库。

Impact of lowering the criterion for impaired fasting glucose on identification of individuals with insulin resistance. The GISIR database.

作者信息

Sesti Giorgio, Andreozzi Francesco, Bonadonna Riccardo C, De Mattia Giancarlo, Leonetti Frida, Luzi Livio, Marini Maria Adelaide, Natali Andrea, Vettor Roberto, Bonora Enzo

机构信息

Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, University of Catanzaro, Italy.

出版信息

Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2008 Feb;24(2):130-6. doi: 10.1002/dmrr.775.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the accuracy of the American Diabetes Association (ADA)2003 definition of impaired fasting glucose (IFG) in identifying subjects with low insulin sensitivity, and determined cardiovascular risk factors in ADA2003 IFG subjects.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This study included 930 non-diabetic Italian Caucasians from the GISIR database in which subjects underwent a hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic clamp performed with a standard technique. Low insulin sensitivity was defined as being in the lower quartile of glucose metabolized during the last hour of the clamp (M). Subjects were stratified in the following groups: normal fasting glucose (NFG) (<100 mg/dL), IFG100 (100-109 mg/dL), ADA1997 IFG110 (110-125 mg/dL), and ADA2003 IFG (100-125 mg/dL).

RESULTS

The sensitivity of identifying subjects with low insulin sensitivity increased adopting the ADA2003 criterion. After Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons, both IFG100 and ADA1997 IFG110 showed significantly higher body mass index (BMI), waist, systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP), triglyceride, fasting plasma insulin (FPI) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and lower insulin sensitivity as compared with NFG. As compared with IFG100, ADA1997 IFG110 showed significantly higher BMI, waist, SBP, FPI, FPG, and lower insulin sensitivity. ADA2003 IFG group showed significantly higher BMI, waist, SBP and DBP, triglyceride, cholesterol, FPI, and FPG, but lower HDL levels and insulin sensitivity compared with NFG subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

Although neither the ADA2003 nor the ADA1997 definition of IFG appears to be particularly efficacious for the identification of subjects' low insulin sensitivity, lowering the criterion to the ADA2003 glucose threshold increased the sensitivity without affecting the specificity. ADA2003 IFG showed a worse cardiovascular risk profile compared with NFG.

摘要

目的

我们评估了美国糖尿病协会(ADA)2003年空腹血糖受损(IFG)定义在识别胰岛素敏感性较低受试者方面的准确性,并确定了ADA2003 IFG受试者的心血管危险因素。

研究设计与方法

本研究纳入了来自GISIR数据库的930名非糖尿病意大利白种人,这些受试者采用标准技术进行了高胰岛素正葡萄糖钳夹试验。低胰岛素敏感性定义为在钳夹试验最后一小时内葡萄糖代谢处于较低四分位数(M)。受试者被分为以下几组:正常空腹血糖(NFG)(<100mg/dL)、IFG100(100 - 109mg/dL)、ADA1997 IFG110(110 - 125mg/dL)和ADA2003 IFG(100 - 125mg/dL)。

结果

采用ADA2003标准识别胰岛素敏感性较低受试者的敏感性有所提高。在进行多重比较的Bonferroni校正后,与NFG相比,IFG100和ADA1997 IFG110的体重指数(BMI)、腰围、收缩压(SBP)和舒张压(DBP)、甘油三酯、空腹血浆胰岛素(FPI)和空腹血糖(FPG)均显著更高,而胰岛素敏感性更低。与IFG100相比,ADA1997 IFG110的BMI、腰围、SBP、FPI、FPG显著更高,胰岛素敏感性更低。与NFG受试者相比,ADA2003 IFG组的BMI、腰围、SBP和DBP、甘油三酯、胆固醇、FPI和FPG显著更高,但高密度脂蛋白(HDL)水平和胰岛素敏感性更低。

结论

尽管ADA2003和ADA1997的IFG定义在识别受试者低胰岛素敏感性方面似乎都不是特别有效,但将标准降低至ADA2003血糖阈值可提高敏感性而不影响特异性。与NFG相比,ADA2003 IFG显示出更差的心血管风险状况。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验