Diagnosis of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus with Point-of-Care Methods for Glucose versus Hospital Laboratory Method Using Isotope Dilution Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry as Reference

Author:

Kristensen Karl12ORCID,Wangel Anne-Marie3ORCID,Katsarou Anastasia45ORCID,Shaat Nael45ORCID,Simmons David67ORCID,Fadl Helena7ORCID,Berntorp Kerstin45ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden

2. Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden

3. Faculty of Health and Society, Department of Care Science, Malmö University, Malmö, Sweden

4. Department of Endocrinology, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden

5. Department of Clinical Sciences Malmö, Lund University, Lund, Sweden

6. Macarthur Clinical School, Western Sydney University, Campbelltown, Australia

7. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, Örebro, Sweden

Abstract

Background. In Sweden, both glucose analyzers in accredited laboratories and point-of-care glucose devices are used for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) diagnosis. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic performance of the HemoCue Glucose 201+ (HC201+) and RT (HC201RT) systems with that of the hospital central laboratory hexokinase method (CL) based on lyophilized citrate tubes, using the isotope dilution gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (ID GC-MS) as reference. Methods. A 75 g oral glucose tolerance test was performed on 135 women screened positive for GDM. Diagnosis was based on the World Health Organization 2013 diagnostic thresholds for fasting (n=135), 1 h (n=52), and 2 h (n=135) glucose measurements. Bland-Altman analysis and surveillance error grids were used to evaluate analytical and clinical accuracy. Results. Significantly more women were diagnosed with GDM by HC201+ (80%) and CL (80%) than with the reference (65%, P<0.001) based on fasting and/or 2 h thresholds, whereas the percentage diagnosed by HC201RT (60%) did not differ significantly from the reference. In Bland-Altman analysis, a positive bias was observed for HC201+ (4.2%) and CL (6.1%) and a negative bias for HC201RT (−1.8%). In the surveillance error grid, 95.9% of the HC201+ values were in the no-risk zone as compared to 98.1% for HC201RT and 97.5% for CL. Conclusions. A substantial positive bias was found for CL measurements resulting in overdiagnosis of GDM. Our findings suggest better performance of HC201RT than HC201+ in GDM diagnosis. The results may have possible implications for GDM diagnosis in Sweden and require further elucidation.

Funder

Skåne County Council Research and Development Foundation

Publisher

Hindawi Limited

Subject

Endocrinology,Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3