Suppr超能文献

糖化血红蛋白检测的差异及其对肥胖青少年糖尿病筛查的影响。

Hemoglobin A1c assay variations and implications for diabetes screening in obese youth.

作者信息

Chan Christine L, McFann Kim, Newnes Lindsey, Nadeau Kristen J, Zeitler Philip S, Kelsey Megan

机构信息

Children's Hospital Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA.

出版信息

Pediatr Diabetes. 2014 Dec;15(8):557-63. doi: 10.1111/pedi.12132. Epub 2014 Mar 17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Standardization of the hemoglobin A1c (A1c) assay has led to its increasing utilization as a screening tool for the diagnosis of prediabetes and type 2 diabetes in youth. However, significant A1c assay variability remains and has implications for clinical management.

OBJECTIVE

To describe our center's experiences with A1c results in youth and to evaluate inter-method differences and their clinical implications.

SUBJECTS

Seventy-five youth (aged 10-18 yr old), body mass index (BMI) ≥85th‰ participated.

METHODS

Seventy-two participants had two A1c values performed on the same sample, one via immunoassay (DCA Vantage Analyzer, A1c1 ) and the other via high performance liquid chromatography (Bio-Rad Variant II, A1c2 ). Nineteen had A1c run on two immunoassay devices (A1c1 and Dimensions Vista, A1c3 ).

RESULTS

Mean age of participants was 13.9 years, BMI% 97.89%, 33% male, 16% white, 21% black, and 61% Hispanic (H). Mean A1c1 was 5.68% ± 0.38 vs. a mean A1c2 of 5.73% ± 0.39, p = 0.049. Concordance in diabetes status between methods was achieved in 79% of subjects. Nineteen subjects with A1c3 results had testing performed an average of 22 ± 9 days prior to A1c1 . Mean A1c3 was 6.24% ± 0.4, compared to a mean A1c1 of 5.74% ± 0.31, (p < 0.0001). A1c1 was on average systematically -0.5 ± 0.28 lower compared to A1c3 . There was poor agreement in diabetes classification between A1c1 and A1c3 , with a concordance in classification between methods of only 36.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically significant inter-method A1c variability exists that impacts patient classification and treatment recommendations. In the screening of obese youth for diabetes, A1c results should be interpreted with caution.

摘要

背景

糖化血红蛋白(A1c)检测的标准化使得其越来越多地被用作青少年糖尿病前期和2型糖尿病诊断的筛查工具。然而,A1c检测仍存在显著差异,这对临床管理有影响。

目的

描述我们中心在青少年A1c检测结果方面的经验,并评估不同检测方法之间的差异及其临床意义。

对象

75名青少年(年龄10 - 18岁)参与,体重指数(BMI)≥第85百分位数。

方法

72名参与者对同一样本进行了两次A1c检测,一次通过免疫测定法(DCA Vantage分析仪,A1c1),另一次通过高效液相色谱法(伯乐Variant II,A1c2)。19名参与者在两种免疫测定设备上进行了A1c检测(A1c1和Dimension Vista,A1c3)。

结果

参与者的平均年龄为13.9岁,BMI%为97.89%,33%为男性,16%为白人,21%为黑人,61%为西班牙裔(H)。平均A1c1为5.68%±0.38,而平均A1c2为5.73%±0.39,p = 0.049。79%的受试者在糖尿病状态的检测方法之间达成了一致性。19名有A1c3检测结果的受试者在进行A1c1检测前平均22±9天进行了该项检测。平均A1c3为6.24%±0.4,相比之下平均A1c1为5.74%±0.31,(p < 0.0001)。与A1c3相比,A1c1平均系统性地低0.5±0.28。A1c1和A1c3在糖尿病分类方面的一致性较差,检测方法之间的分类一致性仅为36.8%。

结论

存在具有临床意义的不同A1c检测方法间的差异,这会影响患者分类和治疗建议。在筛查肥胖青少年糖尿病时,应谨慎解读A1c检测结果。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

2
11-Oxyandrogens in Adolescents With Polycystic Ovary Syndrome.患有多囊卵巢综合征青少年中的11-氧代雄激素
J Endocr Soc. 2022 Mar 9;6(7):bvac037. doi: 10.1210/jendso/bvac037. eCollection 2022 Jul 1.
3
Evaluation and Treatment of Prediabetes in Youth.青少年糖尿病前期的评估与治疗
J Pediatr. 2020 Apr;219:11-22. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2019.12.061. Epub 2020 Mar 3.

本文引用的文献

1
Screening practices for identifying type 2 diabetes in adolescents.青少年2型糖尿病的筛查方法
J Adolesc Health. 2014 Feb;54(2):139-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.07.003. Epub 2013 Aug 20.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验