scholarly journals Usefulness of glycated albumin for early detection of deterioration of glycemic control state after discharge from educational admission

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Murai ◽  
Sumiko Soga ◽  
Hiroshi Saito ◽  
Masafumi Koga
Keyword(s):  
Glycemic Control ◽  
Early Detection ◽  
Glycated Albumin ◽  
Control State

Serum glycated albumin: Potential use as an index of glycemic control in diabetic dogs

2008 ◽  
Vol 33 (5) ◽  
pp. 473-479 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Sako ◽  
A. Mori ◽  
P. Lee ◽  
T. Sato ◽  
H. Mizutani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Glycemic Control ◽  
Glycated Albumin ◽  
Diabetic Dogs ◽  
Potential Use

scholarly journals Results of a Study Comparing Glycated Albumin to Other Glycemic Indices

2019 ◽  
Vol 105 (3) ◽  
pp. 677-687 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cyrus V Desouza ◽  
Richard G Holcomb ◽  
Julio Rosenstock ◽  
Juan P Frias ◽  
Stanley H Hsia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Blood Glucose ◽  
Glycemic Control ◽  
Diabetes Management ◽  
Pearson Correlation ◽  
Glycated Albumin ◽  
Individual Subject ◽  
Glycemic Indices ◽  
Glucose Profiles ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Pearson Correlations

Abstract Context Intermediate-term glycemic control metrics fulfill a need for measures beyond hemoglobin A1C. Objective Compare glycated albumin (GA), a 14-day blood glucose measure, with other glycemic indices. Design 24-week prospective study of assay performance. Setting 8 US clinics. Participants Subjects with type 1 (n = 73) and type 2 diabetes (n = 77) undergoing changes to improve glycemic control (n = 98) or with stable diabetes therapy (n = 52). Interventions GA, fructosamine, and A1C measured at prespecified intervals. Mean blood glucose (MBG) calculated using weekly self-monitored blood glucose profiles. Main Outcome Measures Primary: Pearson correlation between GA and fructosamine. Secondary: magnitude (Spearman correlation) and direction (Kendall correlation) of change of glycemic indices in the first 3 months after a change in diabetes management. Results GA was more concordant (60.8%) with changes in MBG than fructosamine (55.5%) or A1C (45.5%). Across all subjects and visits, the GA Pearson correlation with fructosamine was 0.920. Pearson correlations with A1C were 0.655 for GA and 0.515 for fructosamine (P < .001) and with MBG were 0.590 and 0.454, respectively (P < .001). At the individual subject level, Pearson correlations with both A1C and MBG were higher for GA than for fructosamine in 56% of subjects; only 4% of subjects had higher fructosamine correlations with A1C and MBG. GA had a higher Pearson correlation with A1C and MBG in 82% and 70% of subjects, respectively. Conclusions Compared with fructosamine, GA correlates significantly better with both short-term MBG and long-term A1C and may be more useful than fructosamine in clinical situations requiring monitoring of intermediate-term glycemic control (NCT02489773).

Comparison of Glycemic Markers in Chronic Hemodialysis Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring

2017 ◽  
Vol 47 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Divani ◽  
Panagiotis I. Georgianos ◽  
Triantafyllos Didangelos ◽  
Fotios Iliadis ◽  
Areti Makedou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Glycemic Control ◽  
Continuous Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Glycated Albumin ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Hemodialysis Patients ◽  
Chronic Hemodialysis ◽  
Poor Glycemic Control ◽  
Area Under Roc Curve ◽  
Average Glucose

Background: Glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) among diabetic hemodialysis patients continues to be the standard of care, although its limitations are well recognized. This study evaluated glycated albumin (GA) and glycated serum protein (GSP) as alternatives to HbA1c in detecting glycemic control among diabetic hemodialysis patients using continuous-glucose-monitoring (CGM)-derived glucose as reference standard. Methods: A CGM system (iPRO) was applied for 7 days in 37 diabetic hemodialysis patients to determine glycemic control. The accuracy of GA and GSP versus HbA1c in detecting a 7-day average glucose ≥184 mg/dL was evaluated via receiver-operating-characteristic (ROC) analysis. Results: CGM-derived glucose exhibited strong correlation (r = 0.970, p < 0.001) and acceptable agreement with corresponding capillary glucose measurements obtained by the patients themselves in 1,169 time-points over the 7-day-long CGM. The area under ROC curve (AUC) for GA, GSP, and HbA1c to detect poor glycemic control was 0.976 (0.862–1.000), 0.682 (0.502–0.862), and 0.776 (0.629–0.923) respectively. GA levels >20.3% had 90.9% sensitivity and 96.1% specificity in detecting a 7-day average glucose ≥184 mg/dL. The AUC for GA was significantly higher than the AUC for GSP (difference between areas: 0.294, p < 0.001) and the AUC for HbA1c (difference between areas: 0.199, p < 0.01). Conclusion: Among diabetic hemodialysis patients, GA is a stronger indicator of poor glycemic control assessed with 7-day-long CGM when compared to GSP and HbA1c.

scholarly journals The Use of HbA1c, Glycated Albumin and Continuous Glucose Monitoring to Assess Glucose Control in the Chronic Kidney Disease Population Including Dialysis

Nephron ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 145 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-19
Author(s):  
Tobias Bomholt ◽  
Therese Adrian ◽  
Kirsten Nørgaard ◽  
Ajenthen G. Ranjan ◽  
Thomas Almdal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Glycemic Control ◽  
Continuous Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Glycated Albumin ◽  
Glucose Monitoring ◽  
Glucose Variability ◽  
Glycated Haemoglobin ◽  
Time Data ◽  
Precise Estimation ◽  
Patients With Diabetes ◽  
Mean Glucose

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Glycated haemoglobin A<sub>1c</sub> (HbA<sub>1c</sub>) has limitations as a glycemic marker for patients with diabetes and CKD and for those receiving dialysis. Glycated albumin is an alternative glycemic marker, and some studies have found that glycated albumin more accurately reflects glycemic control than HbA<sub>1c</sub> in these groups. However, several factors are known to influence the value of glycated albumin including proteinuria. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is another alternative to HbA<sub>1c</sub>. CGM allows one to assess mean glucose, glucose variability, and the time spent in hypo-, normo-, and hyperglycemia. Currently, several different CGM models are approved for use in patients receiving dialysis; CKD (not on dialysis) is not a contraindication in any of these models. Some devices are for blind recording, while others provide real-time data to patients. Small studies suggest that CGM could improve glycemic control in hemodialysis patients, but this has not been studied for individual CKD stages. <b><i>Summary:</i></b> Glycated albumin and CGM avoid the pitfalls of HbA<sub>1c</sub> in CKD and dialysis populations. However, the value of glycated albumin may be affected by several factors. CGM provides a precise estimation of the mean glucose. Here, we discuss the strengths and limitations for using HbA1c, glycated albumin, or CGM in CKD and dialysis population. <b><i>Key Messages:</i></b> Glycated albumin is an alternative glycemic marker but is affected by proteinuria. CGM provides a precise estimation of mean glucose and glucose variability. It remains unclear if CGM improves glycemic control in the CKD and dialysis populations.

Adequate glycemic control prevents cholesterol efflux impairment and lipid accumulation in macrophages induced by advanced glycated albumin

2018 ◽  
Vol 275 ◽  
pp. e171
Author(s):  
A. Machado-lima ◽  
R. Tallada Iborra ◽  
L. Shimabukuro Okuda ◽  
R Souza Pinto ◽  
E. Regina Nakandakare ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Glycemic Control ◽  
Lipid Accumulation ◽  
Cholesterol Efflux ◽  
Glycated Albumin

Gestational diabetes mellitus management: diet and lifestyle

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabika Allehdan ◽  
Asma Basha ◽  
Reema Tayyem
Keyword(s):  
Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Glycemic Control ◽  
Gestational Diabetes ◽  
Gestational Diabetes Mellitus ◽  
Glycated Albumin ◽  
Nutritional Therapy ◽  
Population Characteristics ◽  
Glucose Measurement ◽  
Pharmacological Agents ◽  
Content Type

Purpose Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is one of the most common complications of pregnancy. GDM is defined as glucose intolerance of variable severity with onset or first recognition during pregnancy. The purpose of this paper is to produce information on prevalence, screening and diagnosis, pathophysiology and dietary, medical and lifestyle management of GDM. Design/methodology/approach This literature review aimed to document and record the results of the most updated studies published dealing with dietary, medical and lifestyle factors in managing GDM. Findings The prevalence of GDM differs worldwide based on population characteristics, race/ethnicity and diagnostic criteria. The pathophysiology of GDM is multifactorial and it is likely that genetic and environmental factors are associated with the occurrence of GDM. Medical nutritional therapy remains the mainstay of GDM management and aerobic and resistance physical activities are helpful adjunctive therapy when euglycemia is not attained by the medical nutritional therapy alone. When diet and exercise fail to achieve glycemic control, pharmacological agents such as insulin therapy and oral hypoglycemic medications are prescribed. Plasma glucose measurement is an essential part of glycemic control during pregnancy, as well as glycemic control can be evaluated using indicators of glycemic control such as hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), glycated albumin and fructosamine. Originality/value This review is a comprehensive review that illustrates the effect of healthy diet, medical therapy and lifestyle change on improving GDM condition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document