4.3 Article

Characteristics of people with high visit-to-visit glycaemic variability in Type 2 diabetes

期刊

DIABETIC MEDICINE
卷 35, 期 2, 页码 262-269

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/dme.13435

关键词

-

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust
  2. MRC [MR/N00633X/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims Increased visit-to-visit glycaemic variability is independently associated with adverse outcomes in Type 2 diabetes. Our aim was to identify the patient characteristics associated with raised visit-to-visit glycaemic variability in people with Type 2 diabetes. Methods A case-control study was conducted to establish associations between HbA(1c) variability and clinical covariates in 10 130 people with Type 2 diabetes. Variability was calculated by two metrics [sd and coefficient of variation (CV)] from a minimum of four HbA(1c) readings obtained over a 4-year period. High and low variability groups were defined as the top and bottom tertile of the sd or CV, and used in logistic regression analyses including a number of clinical and biochemical covariates. The analyses were stratified into low mean (< 53 mmol/mol; 7%) and high mean ( 53 mmol/mol; 7%) HbA(1c) groups. Results Findings were consistent across both HbA(1c) groups and variability metrics. Treatment, independent of other factors, was the most strongly associated covariate for the risk of high HbA(1c) variability. A six-fold increased risk was observed in the low HbA(1c) group, between the most and least intense treatment regimens (P < 0.001). Similar findings were present in the high HbA(1c) group with a three-fold increase in risk (P < 0.001). In addition, male gender, younger age, reduced HDL-cholesterol and increased BMI were all found to be independently associated with raised visit-to-visit glycaemic variability. Conclusions Intensive treatment resulting in low mean HbA(1c) was associated with marked increase in HbA(1c) variability. Irrespective of diabetes control, the greatest visit-to-visit variability was observed in young, insulin resistant men.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据