Cargando…

Glycemic dispersion: a new index for screening high glycemic variability

OBJECTIVE: For patients with diabetes, high-frequency and -amplitude glycemic variability may be more harmful than continuous hyperglycemia; however, there is still a lack of screening indicators that can quickly and easily assess the level of glycemic variability. The aim of this study was to inves...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shi, Rui, Feng, Lei, Liu, Yan-Mei, Xu, Wen-Bo, Luo, Bei-Bei, Tang, Ling-Tong, Bi, Qian-Ye, Cao, Hui-Ying
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10169464/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37158980
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13098-023-01077-y
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: For patients with diabetes, high-frequency and -amplitude glycemic variability may be more harmful than continuous hyperglycemia; however, there is still a lack of screening indicators that can quickly and easily assess the level of glycemic variability. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the glycemic dispersion index is effective for screening high glycemic variability. METHODS: A total of 170 diabetes patients hospitalized in the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University were included in this study. After admission, the fasting plasma glucose, 2-hour postprandial plasma glucose, and glycosylated hemoglobin A1c were measured. The peripheral capillary blood glucose was measured seven times in 24 h, before and after each of three meals and before bedtime. The standard deviation of the seven peripheral blood glucose values was calculated, and a standard deviation of > 2.0 was used as the threshold of high glycemic variability. The glycemic dispersion index was calculated and its diagnostic efficacy for high glycemic variability was determined by the Mann–Whitney U test, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and, Pearson correlation analysis. RESULTS: The glycemic dispersion index of patients with high glycemic variability was significantly higher than that of those with low glycemic variability (p < 0.01). The best cutoff value of the glycemic dispersion index for screening high glycemic variability was 4.21. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.901 (95% CI: 0.856–0.945) and had a sensitivity of 0.781 and specificity of 0.905. It was correlated with the standard deviation of blood glucose values (r = 0.813, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The glycemic dispersion index had good sensitivity and specificity for screening high glycemic variability. It was significantly associated with the standard deviation of blood glucose concentration and is simple and easy to calculate. It was an effective screening indicator of high glycemic variability. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13098-023-01077-y.