Park K S, Park Y J, Kim S W, Shin C S, Park D J, Koh J J, Kim S Y, Kim N K, Lee H K
Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Korea.
Korean J Intern Med. 2000 Jan;15(1):37-41. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2000.15.1.37.
To compare the prevalence and metabolic profiles of glucose tolerance categories according to World Health Organization(WHO) and 1997 American Diabetes Association(ADA) fasting criteria for the diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and impaired glucose metabolism in the Korean population.
2251 subjects without previous history of diabetes, who participated in the Yonchon diabetes epidemiology survey in 1993, were classified according to both criteria. The prevalence of glucose tolerance categories and the agreement across all categories of glucose tolerance were calculated. Metabolic characteristics of different glucose tolerance categories were compared.
The prevalence of diabetes and impaired fasting glucose(IFG) according to ADA fasting criteria was similar to those of diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance(IGT) according to WHO criteria, respectively. However, 35.5% of the subjects who were diagnosed as diabetes by WHO criteria were reclassified as either IFG or normal fasting glucose (NFG), and 38.5% of diabetic patients according to ADA fasting criteria were IGT or normal glucose tolerance (NGT) by WHO criteria. Only 31.3% of IGT subjects remained as IFG and 62.1% were reclassified as NFG. Similarly, 69.4% of IFG subjects were NGT by WHO criteria. The agreement between the two criteria was poor (K = 0.31). Discordant diabetes groups had higher WHR, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, cholesterol and triglyceride levels than concordant non-diabetes group. Non-diabetes(WHO)/diabetes(ADA) group had higher WHR than diabetes (WHO)/non-diabetes(ADA) group. There were no differences in other metabolic characteristics between the two discordant diabetes groups. IGT/NFG and NGT/IFG group showed higher BMI, WHR, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, cholesterol and triglyceride levels than NGT/NFG group. Metabolic characteristics of IGT/NFG group were not different from those of NGT/IFG group except IGT/NFG subjects were older than NGT/IFG subjects.
The agreement between WHO and ADA fasting criteria was poor. ADA fasting criteria can detect new diabetic patients and subjects with impaired glucose metabolism who are not classified as diabetes or IGT by WHO criteria. However, a substantial number of subjects, who may have increased cardiovascular risk and/or increased risk for the development of diabetes and its complication, will be missed when using ADA fasting criteria.
根据世界卫生组织(WHO)和1997年美国糖尿病协会(ADA)的空腹诊断标准,比较韩国人群中糖尿病和糖代谢受损的糖耐量类别患病率及代谢特征。
将1993年参加延川糖尿病流行病学调查且无糖尿病病史的2251名受试者,按照两种标准进行分类。计算糖耐量类别患病率及所有糖耐量类别间的一致性。比较不同糖耐量类别的代谢特征。
根据ADA空腹标准诊断的糖尿病和空腹血糖受损(IFG)患病率,分别与根据WHO标准诊断的糖尿病和糖耐量受损(IGT)患病率相似。然而,根据WHO标准诊断为糖尿病的受试者中,35.5%被重新分类为IFG或空腹血糖正常(NFG),根据ADA空腹标准诊断的糖尿病患者中,38.5%根据WHO标准为IGT或糖耐量正常(NGT)。仅31.3%的IGT受试者仍为IFG,62.1%被重新分类为NFG。同样,69.4%的IFG受试者根据WHO标准为NGT。两种标准间的一致性较差(K = 0.31)。不一致的糖尿病组比一致的非糖尿病组有更高的腰臀比、收缩压和舒张压、胆固醇及甘油三酯水平。非糖尿病(WHO)/糖尿病(ADA)组比糖尿病(WHO)/非糖尿病(ADA)组有更高的腰臀比。两个不一致的糖尿病组间其他代谢特征无差异。IGT/NFG和NGT/IFG组比NGT/NFG组有更高的体重指数、腰臀比、收缩压和舒张压、胆固醇及甘油三酯水平。IGT/NFG组的代谢特征与NGT/IFG组无差异,只是IGT/NFG受试者比NGT/IFG受试者年龄更大。
WHO和ADA空腹标准间的一致性较差。ADA空腹标准能检测出WHO标准未分类为糖尿病或IGT的新糖尿病患者及糖代谢受损受试者。然而,使用ADA空腹标准时,大量可能增加心血管疾病风险和/或将增加糖尿病及其并发症发生风险的受试者将会被漏诊。