Key result
Selective admission glucose screening in AMI detects ~86% of incident diabetes while reducing HbA1c testing.
Why the study?
Does a selective screening protocol using random and fasting plasma glucose improve the efficiency of identifying incident diabetes mellitus in patients with acute myocardial infarction compared to universal HbA1c screening?
Observational (n=1,574)
Yes
Does a selective screening protocol using random and fasting plasma glucose improve the efficiency of identifying incident diabetes mellitus in patients with acute myocardial infarction compared to universal HbA1c screening?
Targeted HbA1c testing based on admission random or fasting glucose can efficiently identify the vast majority of incident diabetes cases in AMI patients while halving the number of tests needed.
May support selective glucose-based HbA1c testing to improve efficiency in AMI; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
OBJECTIVE: Incident diabetes mellitus (DM) is important to recognize in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). To develop an efficient screening strategy, we explored the use of random plasma glucose (RPG) at admission and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) to select patients with AMI for glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) testing. DESIGN SETTING ANDPARTICIPANTS: Prospective registry of 1574 patients with AMI not taking glucose-lowering medication from 24 US hospitals. All patients had HbA1c measured at a core laboratory and admission RPG and ≥2 FPGs recorded during hospitalization. We examined potential combinations of RPG and FPG and compared these with HbA1c≥6.5%-considered the gold standard for DM diagnosis in these analyses. RESULTS: An RPG>140 mg/dL or FPG≥126 mg/dL had high sensitivity for DM diagnosis. Combining these into a screening protocol (if admission RPG>140, check HbA1c; or if FPG≥126 on a subsequent day, check HbA1c) led to HbA1c testing in 50% of patients and identified 86% with incident DM (number needed to screen (NNS)=3.3 to identify 1 case of DM; vs NNS=5.6 with universal HbA1c screening). Alternatively, using an RPG>180 led to HbA1c testing in 40% of patients with AMI and identified 82% of DM (NNS=2.7). CONCLUSIONS: We have established two potential selective screening methods for DM in the setting of AMI that could identify the vast majority of incident DM by targeted screening of 40-50% of patients with AMI with HbA1c testing. Using these methods may efficiently identify patients with AMI with DM so that appropriate education and treatment can be promptly initiated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arnold et al. (2014) conducted an observational in acute myocardial infarction (n=1,574). Selective screening using random and fasting plasma glucose vs. Universal HbA1c screening was evaluated on Identification of incident diabetes mellitus. Selective screening using admission random plasma glucose >140 mg/dL or fasting plasma glucose ≥126 mg/dL identified 86% of incident diabetes cases, requiring HbA1c testing in 50% of AMI patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: