Department of Pathology and Anatomical Sciences, University of Missouri School of Medicine, One Hospital Dr., Columbia, MO 65212, USA.
Clin Chim Acta. 2013 Mar 15;418:73-6. doi: 10.1016/j.cca.2012.12.022. Epub 2013 Jan 12.
Carbamylated hemoglobin (carbHb) is reported to interfere with measurement and interpretation of HbA(1c) in diabetic patients with chronic renal failure (CRF). There is also concern that HbA1c may give low results in these patients due to shortened erythrocyte survival.
We evaluated the effect of carbHb on HbA(1c) measurements and compared HbA(1c) with glycated albumin (GA) in patients with and without renal disease to test if CRF causes clinically significant bias in HbA(1c) results by using 11 assay methods. Subjects included those with and without renal failure and diabetes. Each subject's estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was used to determine the presence and degree of the renal disease. A multiple regression model was used to determine if the relationship between HbA(1c) results obtained from each test method and the comparative method was significantly (p<0.05) affected by eGFR. These methods were further evaluated for clinical significance by using the difference between the eGRF quartiles of >7% at 6 or 9% HbA(1c). The relationship between HbA(1c) and glycated albumin (GA) in patients with and without renal failure was also compared.
Some methods showed small but statistically significant effects of eGFR; none of these differences were clinically significant. If GA is assumed to better reflect glycemic control, then HbA(1c) was approximately 1.5% HbA(1c) lower in patients with renal failure.
Although most methods can measure HbA(1c) accurately in patients with renal failure, healthcare providers must interpret these test results cautiously in these patients due to the propensity for shortened erythrocyte survival in renal failure.
已有报道称,在患有慢性肾衰竭(CRF)的糖尿病患者中,氨甲酰血红蛋白(carbHb)会干扰 HbA(1c)的测量和解读。由于红细胞寿命缩短,这些患者的 HbA1c 检测结果可能偏低,这也引起了人们的关注。
我们评估了 carbHb 对 HbA(1c)测量的影响,并比较了有和无肾病患者的 HbA(1c)与糖化白蛋白(GA),以测试 CRF 是否会导致 HbA(1c)结果出现临床显著偏差,使用了 11 种检测方法。受试者包括有和无肾衰竭及糖尿病的患者。每位患者的估算肾小球滤过率(eGFR)用于确定是否存在以及肾功能损害的程度。使用多元回归模型来确定,从每种检测方法获得的 HbA(1c)结果与比较方法之间的关系是否受 eGFR 的显著影响(p<0.05)。通过使用 6%或 9%HbA(1c)时 eGFR 四分位数相差>7%的差异,这些方法进一步进行了临床意义评估。还比较了有和无肾衰竭患者的 HbA(1c)与糖化白蛋白(GA)之间的关系。
一些方法显示 eGFR 的影响虽小但具有统计学意义;但这些差异均无临床意义。如果假设 GA 能更好地反映血糖控制情况,那么肾衰竭患者的 HbA(1c)值约比 HbA(1c)低 1.5%。
尽管大多数方法都可以准确测量肾衰竭患者的 HbA(1c),但由于肾衰竭时红细胞寿命缩短,医护人员必须谨慎解读这些检测结果。