Search

A two-step screening strategy was used to compare the metabolic risk profiles between subjects from Kinmen, Taiwan, who had fasting and 2-hr plasma glucose impairment and were considered at high risk of diabetes due to a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) between 5.6 and 7.8 mmol/l at the baseline screening. 1855 subjects without a previous diagnosis of diabetes who had an FPG of 5.6-7.8 mmol/l at the first step of screening were invited to undergo an Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT) for the second step of screening, and 1456 of these subjects (774 males and 682 females) completed the OGTT. Subjects who completed the OGTT were classified into normal, isolated impaired fasting glucose (isolated IFG), isolated impaired glucose tolerance (isolated IGT), both IFG and IGT, or undiagnosed diabetes groups. Sex-specific, age-adjusted mean values of metabolic risk profiles for various categories of glucose intolerance were calculated. The results for IFG and IGT agreed in only 20.8% of subjects. The clinical features of subjects with IGT (2-hr glucose impairment) were associated with cardiovascular risk profiles, while those subjects with isolated IFG (fasting glucose impairment only) were not. If the definition of IFG alone had been used for glucose intolerance screening, about 66.6% of subjects with IGT (i.e., isolated IGT with 2-hr glucose impairment and a normal fasting state) who had cardiovascular risk profiles would have been undetected.

In this population-based survey, we investigated the prevalence of varying degrees of glucose tolerance among residents of Kin-Chen, Kinmen, as well as the association of glucose tolerance status with potential risk factors for type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (CVD). We focused particularly on subjects with normal 2-h postload glucose level (

To compare clinical profiles and risk of diabetes between subjects with transient (trIGT) and persistent (pIGT) impaired glucose tolerance in Taiwan.In the pIGT group, IGT was diagnosed in two consecutive periods (1992-1994 and 1995-1996); in the trIGT group, the diagnosis was IGT at the baseline but normal glucose tolerance in the second period. The normal group was defined by fasting plasma glucose6.1 mmol/L and 2-hour post-load plasma glucose7.8 mmol/L in both periods. All three groups were considered eligible subjects for further follow up (1998-1999).Among 298 nondiabetic subjects at baseline, there were 29 new cases of diabetes diagnosed according to 1999 WHO criteria in 1,614.3 person-years of follow-up (1.79%/year; 95% CI = 1.14-2.44%/year). Among subjects with normal, trIGT, or pIGT, the incidence rates were 0.73%/year (8/1,093.0; 95% CI = 0.22-1.24%/year), 2.57%/year (7/272.2; 95% CI = 0.67-4.47%/year), and 5.62%/year (14/249.1; 95% CI = 2.68-8.56%/year), respectively.The group with trIGT had abnormal glucose tolerance and beta-cell dysfunction, which may represent an earlier stage than the group with pIGT in development of type 2 diabetes. Moreover, pIGT, insulin resistance, and beta-cell dysfunction played independent roles in the deterioration from IGT to diabetes.

A two-step screening strategy was used to compare the metabolic risk profiles between subjects from Kinmen, Taiwan, who had fasting and 2-hr plasma glucose impairment and were considered at high risk of diabetes due to a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) between 5.6 and 7.8 mmol/l at the baseline screening. 1855 subjects without a previous diagnosis of diabetes who had an FPG of 5.6-7.8 mmol/l at the first step of screening were invited to undergo an Oral Glucose Tolerance Test (OGTT) for the second step of screening, and 1456 of these subjects (774 males and 682 females) completed the OGTT. Subjects who completed the OGTT were classified into normal, isolated impaired fasting glucose (isolated IFG), isolated impaired glucose tolerance (isolated IGT), both IFG and IGT, or undiagnosed diabetes groups. Sex-specific, age-adjusted mean values of metabolic risk profiles for various categories of glucose intolerance were calculated. The results for IFG and IGT agreed in only 20.8% of subjects. The clinical features of subjects with IGT (2-hr glucose impairment) were associated with cardiovascular risk profiles, while those subjects with isolated IFG (fasting glucose impairment only) were not. If the definition of IFG alone had been used for glucose intolerance screening, about 66.6% of subjects with IGT (i.e., isolated IGT with 2-hr glucose impairment and a normal fasting state) who had cardiovascular risk profiles would have been undetected.