OBJECTIVE -The aim of this study was to determine the predictive value of silent myocardial ischemia (SMI) and cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) in asymptomatic diabetic patients.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS -We recruited 120 diabetic patients with no history of myocardial infarction or angina, a normal 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG), and two or more additional risk factors. SMI assessment was carried out by means of an ECG stress test, a thallium-201 myocardial scintigraphy with dipyridamole, and 48-h ECG monitoring. CAN was searched for by standardized tests evaluating heart rate variations. Accurate follow-up information for 3-7 years (mean 4.5) was obtained in 107 patients.RESULTS -There was evidence of SMI in 33 patients (30.7%). CAN was detected in 33 of the 75 patients (38.9%) who were tested, and a major cardiac event occurred in 11 of them. Among these 75 patients, the proportion of major cardiac events in the SMI ϩ patients was not significantly higher than that in the SMI Ϫ patients (6 of 25 vs. 5 of 50 patients), whereas it was significantly higher in the CAN ϩ patients than in the CAN Ϫ patients (8 of 33 vs. 3 of 42 patients; P = 0.04), with a relative risk of 4.16 (95% CI 1.01-17.19) and was the highest in the patients with both SMI and CAN (5 of 10 patients). After adjusting for SMI, there was a significant association between CAN and major cardiac events (P = 0.04).CONCLUSIONS -In asymptomatic diabetic patients, CAN appears to be a better predictor of major cardiac events than SMI. The risk linked to CAN appears to be independent of SMI and is the highest when CAN is associated with SMI.

OBJECTIVEWe aimed to evaluate a selective screening strategy for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) based on the presence of risk factors: BMI ≥25 kg/m2, age ≥35 years, family history of diabetes, personal history of GDM, or birth of a child with macrosomia.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSOf 20,630 deliveries between 2002 and 2010, we selected 18,775 deliveries in women with no known diabetes and for whom all risk factors were known. GDM was universally screened and defined as fasting plasma glucose level ≥5.3 mmol/L and/or 2-h postload (75 g) glucose level ≥7.8 mmol/L.RESULTSThe prevalence of at least one risk factor has increased since 2002 (P < 0.001) from 51.7 to 61.5%, with no change in the GDM prevalence (mean 14.4%, intention to screen). At least one risk factor was present in 58.5% of women who represented 65.3% of all those with GDM. The presence of risk factors was significantly associated with GDM (odds ratio 1.4 [95% CI 1.3–1.5], P < 0.001) and with GDM-related events (preeclampsia/large for gestational age/dystocia) (P < 0.001) with the following incidences: no GDM/no risk factor 8.8%, no GDM/risk factor 11.1%, GDM/no risk factor 16.7%, and GDM/risk factor 18.2%.CONCLUSIONSThe presence of risk factors increased during the last decade. This condition is predictive of GDM and GDM-related events. However, a selective screening would lead to missing one-third of the women with GDM who, even without risk factors, had more events than women without GDM. Therefore, these data stand against the present selective screening currently proposed in the French guidelines.