Suppr超能文献

糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)与血糖管理指标的不一致:真实世界分析。

HbA1c and Glucose Management Indicator Discordance: A Real-World Analysis.

机构信息

Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA.

出版信息

Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021 Apr;23(4):253-258. doi: 10.1089/dia.2020.0501. Epub 2020 Dec 1.

Abstract

There can be marked discordance between laboratory and estimated (using the glucose management indicator [GMI]) glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). This may cause errors in diabetes management. This study evaluates discordance between laboratory and CGM-estimated HbA1c (eA1C). We performed a retrospective review of patients with diabetes who use CGM. The patients were seen at the University of Washington (UW) Diabetes Care Center from 2012 to 2019. We used UW's Institute of Translational Health Sciences to extract eligible encounters from the electronic medical record. We required that patients use CGM and that HbA1c and sensor data be obtained fewer than 4 weeks apart. There were no exclusion criteria. We calculated HbA1c-GMI discordance for each subject and assessed for any impact of comorbidities. We defined HbA1c-GMI discordance as absolute difference between laboratory and eA1C. This study included 641 separate office encounters. Ninety-one percent of patients had type 1 diabetes. Most patients had diabetes for greater than 20 years. The mean duration of CGM wear was 24.5 ± 8 days. Only 11% of patients had HbA1c-GMI discordance <0.1%, but 50% and 22% had differences ≥0.5% and ≥1%. There was increased discordance with advanced chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60). We found substantial discordance between laboratory and eA1C in a real-world setting. Clinicians need be aware that HbA1c may not as accurately reflect mean glucose as previously appreciated.

摘要

实验室检测的糖化血红蛋白 (HbA1c) 与(使用血糖管理指标 [GMI])连续血糖监测 (CGM) 估算的 HbA1c 之间可能存在显著差异。这可能导致糖尿病管理中的错误。本研究评估了实验室和 CGM 估算的 HbA1c(eA1C)之间的差异。

我们对使用 CGM 的糖尿病患者进行了回顾性研究。这些患者于 2012 年至 2019 年在华盛顿大学 (UW) 糖尿病护理中心就诊。我们使用 UW 的转化健康科学研究所从电子病历中提取合格的就诊记录。我们要求患者使用 CGM,且 HbA1c 和传感器数据的获取时间间隔少于 4 周。无排除标准。我们计算了每位患者的 HbA1c-GMI 差异,并评估了合并症的任何影响。我们将 HbA1c-GMI 差异定义为实验室和 eA1C 之间的绝对差异。

本研究共包括 641 次独立的门诊就诊。91%的患者患有 1 型糖尿病。大多数患者患有糖尿病超过 20 年。CGM 佩戴的平均时间为 24.5±8 天。只有 11%的患者的 HbA1c-GMI 差异<0.1%,但 50%和 22%的患者差异分别≥0.5%和≥1%。随着慢性肾脏病(估计肾小球滤过率<60)的进展,差异更大。

我们在真实环境中发现实验室检测的 HbA1c 与 eA1C 之间存在显著差异。临床医生需要意识到,HbA1c 可能不像之前认为的那样准确地反映平均血糖。

相似文献

1
HbA1c and Glucose Management Indicator Discordance: A Real-World Analysis.
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021 Apr;23(4):253-258. doi: 10.1089/dia.2020.0501. Epub 2020 Dec 1.
3
Discordance Between Glycated Hemoglobin A1c and the Glucose Management Indicator in People With Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease.
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2023 Nov;17(6):1553-1562. doi: 10.1177/19322968221092050. Epub 2022 Apr 25.
4
Discordance Between Glucose Management Indicator and Glycated Hemoglobin in People Without Diabetes.
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2023 May;25(5):324-328. doi: 10.1089/dia.2022.0544. Epub 2023 Mar 3.
7
Performance of the Glucose Management Indicator (GMI) in Type 2 Diabetes.
Clin Chem. 2023 Apr 3;69(4):422-428. doi: 10.1093/clinchem/hvac210.
8
An Examination of the Glucose Management Indicator in Young Children with Type 1 Diabetes.
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2022 Nov;16(6):1505-1512. doi: 10.1177/19322968211023171. Epub 2021 Jun 7.
9
Glucose Management Indicator (GMI): A New Term for Estimating A1C From Continuous Glucose Monitoring.
Diabetes Care. 2018 Nov;41(11):2275-2280. doi: 10.2337/dc18-1581. Epub 2018 Sep 17.

引用本文的文献

1
The Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring to Diagnose Stage 2 Type 1 Diabetes.
J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2025 May 30:19322968251333441. doi: 10.1177/19322968251333441.
2
Joint effect of nicotine use and diabetes distress on glycemic control in young adults with type 1 diabetes.
J Diabetes Complications. 2025 Aug;39(8):109083. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2025.109083. Epub 2025 May 17.
4
Managing discordance between HbA and glucose management indicator.
Diabet Med. 2025 Jun;42(6):e70023. doi: 10.1111/dme.70023. Epub 2025 Mar 23.
7
9
Sensor-Derived A1C: A New and Better Term.
Clin Diabetes. 2024 Summer;42(3):428. doi: 10.2337/cd23-0083. Epub 2023 Dec 14.
10
HbA1c overestimates the glucose management indicator: a pilot study in patients with diabetes, chronic kidney disease not on dialysis, and anemia using isCGM.
Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab. 2024 May 31;15:20420188241252546. doi: 10.1177/20420188241252546. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

1
TIR generated by continuous glucose monitoring is associated with peripheral nerve function in type 2 diabetes.
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2020 Aug;166:108289. doi: 10.1016/j.diabres.2020.108289. Epub 2020 Jun 29.
4
Validation of Time in Range as an Outcome Measure for Diabetes Clinical Trials.
Diabetes Care. 2019 Mar;42(3):400-405. doi: 10.2337/dc18-1444. Epub 2018 Oct 23.
5
Glucose Management Indicator (GMI): A New Term for Estimating A1C From Continuous Glucose Monitoring.
Diabetes Care. 2018 Nov;41(11):2275-2280. doi: 10.2337/dc18-1581. Epub 2018 Sep 17.
6
Association of Time in Range, as Assessed by Continuous Glucose Monitoring, With Diabetic Retinopathy in Type 2 Diabetes.
Diabetes Care. 2018 Nov;41(11):2370-2376. doi: 10.2337/dc18-1131. Epub 2018 Sep 10.
8
Optimal Sampling Duration for Continuous Glucose Monitoring to Determine Long-Term Glycemic Control.
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018 Apr;20(4):314-316. doi: 10.1089/dia.2017.0455. Epub 2018 Mar 22.
9
Racial Differences in the Relationship of Glucose Concentrations and Hemoglobin A1c Levels.
Ann Intern Med. 2018 Feb 6;168(3):232-233. doi: 10.7326/L17-0589.
10
International Consensus on Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring.
Diabetes Care. 2017 Dec;40(12):1631-1640. doi: 10.2337/dc17-1600.

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