2012
DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2012.03643.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A simple strategy for screening for glucose intolerance, using glycated haemoglobin, in individuals admitted with acute coronary syndrome

Abstract: Glucose intolerance is common but often remains undiagnosed and untreated in people with acute coronary syndrome. The best approach to screening for glucose intolerance post-acute coronary syndrome remains debated. The World Health Organization has recently advocated the use of HbA 1c in diagnosing Type 2 diabetes. A screening strategy using HbA 1c as the preferred test would be pragmatic and improve early detection and management of glucose intolerance in acute coronary care practice. In this commentary, we d… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…HbA 1c has also been shown to independently predict glucose intolerance at 3 months in patients admitted with ACS without known diabetes [odds ratio (95% CI): 2.58 (1.17–6.09) p  = 0.024], and correlates with 2hPG and OGTT [16]. We repeated the HbA 1c at 2 weeks, although this has been previously recommended at 4–8 weeks mainly on logistical grounds, fully recognising that a one-off test would have perhaps been sufficient for diagnostic purposes [10]. We found that repeat testing at 2 weeks was feasible, practical and a reassuring test to confirm the diagnosis and promptly inform patients of the diagnosis of potential glucose abnormalities.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…HbA 1c has also been shown to independently predict glucose intolerance at 3 months in patients admitted with ACS without known diabetes [odds ratio (95% CI): 2.58 (1.17–6.09) p  = 0.024], and correlates with 2hPG and OGTT [16]. We repeated the HbA 1c at 2 weeks, although this has been previously recommended at 4–8 weeks mainly on logistical grounds, fully recognising that a one-off test would have perhaps been sufficient for diagnostic purposes [10]. We found that repeat testing at 2 weeks was feasible, practical and a reassuring test to confirm the diagnosis and promptly inform patients of the diagnosis of potential glucose abnormalities.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Patients with an intermediate or high initial HbA 1c were invited for a repeat HbA 1c at 2 weeks as per American Diabetes Association guidelines to confirm diagnosis of Type 2 diabetes for those with high levels [13]. Patients with a repeat HbA 1c within intermediate range were further categorised by an OGTT at 3 months as previously recommended [10]. This was a standardised 75-g OGTT, performed in the morning, after a 12-h overnight fast, and results were defined as normal, impaired or consistent with diabetes diagnosis, according to the WHO 1998 definitions [14].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Owing to this attempts to construct algorithms to limit the use of OGTT have been made. An algorithm combining FPG and HbA1c limited the use of OGTT in people with impaired fasting glucose (IFG),15 and Gholap et al 16 presented an algorithm based on HbA1c in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Both these studies based their cut point on ‘pragmatic’ grounds due to limited availability of actual data 16.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An algorithm combining FPG and HbA1c limited the use of OGTT in people with impaired fasting glucose (IFG),15 and Gholap et al 16 presented an algorithm based on HbA1c in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Both these studies based their cut point on ‘pragmatic’ grounds due to limited availability of actual data 16. A 1-hour plasma glucose (1hPG) test has been suggested as a time-saving option, still retaining reasonably good accuracy in detecting type 2 DM when screening high-risk individuals in a general population 17…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%