RESUMO
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: Posttransplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM) is a serious long-term complication that has a negative impact on graft and patient survival. The purpose of the present study was to describe the incidence of PTDM in a Mexican cohort and evaluate its association with a previous family history of diabetes (FHD). METHODS: A retrospective single-center cohort study was conducted on patients undergoing liver transplantation (LT). The primary outcome was time from LT to PTDM. The diagnosis of PTDM was established using the ADA criteria. A mediation analysis that used adjusted Cox regression models and considered pretransplant prediabetes a mediator was performed, to determine the total effect and direct effect of FHD on PTDM. RESULTS: A total of 152 patients were included, with a median follow-up time of 41 months; 19.2% (nâ¯=â¯29) had pretransplant diabetes. During the follow-up time, 15% of patients developed PTDM (nâ¯=â¯23), with an incidence rate of 4.71 cases/100 person-years. PTDM was significantly higher in patients with FHD, compared with those with no FHD (8.72 cases/100 person-years vs 2.04 cases/100 person-years, respectively; pâ¯=â¯0.001). The adjusted hazard ratio of PTDM for FHD was 4.14 (95% CI 1.60-10.7), pâ¯=â¯0.005) and 3.48 (95% CI 1.35-9.01, pâ¯=â¯0.010), when further controlled for pretransplant prediabetes. CONCLUSION: The occurrence of PTDM was similar to that reported in most international studies. As with type 2 diabetes, family history plays an important role in the development of PTDM, even after accounting for pretransplant prediabetes. Patients with FHD should undergo a stricter metabolic program.
RESUMO
Background: Early detection of post-transplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM) allows prompt clinical and pharmacological interventions, reducing the chance of adverse outcomes. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the overall diagnostic accuracy of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) for the diagnosis of renal PTDM. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase and SCOPUS up to June 2016. Studies that included adults without previous diabetes were selected if they reported an oral glucose tolerance test as a reference test, HbA1c levels measured by standardized methods and data necessary for drawing 2 × 2 tables. A bivariate model was used to calculate the pooled estimates. Results: Based on 2057 kidney recipients from six studies, an HbA1c cut-off point of 6.5% in early months after transplant resulted in sensitivity of 0.48 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.31-0.65], specificity of 0.96 (95% CI 0.95-0.97), positive likelihood ratio (PLR) of 12.0 (95% CI 7.4-19.5) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) of 0.54 (95% CI 0.38-0.77). Based on 1888 kidney recipients from four studies, an HbA1c cut-off point of 6.2% early after transplant resulted in sensitivity of 0.76 (95% CI 0.49-0.91), specificity of 0.89 (95% CI 0.86-0.92), PLR of 7.18 (95% CI 5.29-9.75) and NLR of 0.27 (95% CI 0.11-0.65). Conclusion: HbA1c cut-off points of 6.5% and 6.2% presented high specificity but low/moderate sensitivity to diagnose PTDM.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Hemoglobinas Glicadas/metabolismo , Transplante de Rim , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/diagnóstico , Corticosteroides/efeitos adversos , Ciclosporina/efeitos adversos , Diabetes Mellitus/induzido quimicamente , Diabetes Mellitus/metabolismo , Teste de Tolerância a Glucose , Rejeição de Enxerto/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Imunossupressores/efeitos adversos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/induzido quimicamente , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/metabolismo , Sensibilidade e Especificidade , Tacrolimo/efeitos adversosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The role of glycated hemoglobin (A1C) in the screening and diagnosis of posttransplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM) is still not entirely understood. We evaluated the use of A1C test in renal transplant recipients at four months after transplantation. METHODS: A total of 122 out of 274 patients without previous diabetes that underwent kidney transplantation were enrolled. ROC curve was used to analyze the performance of A1C to diagnose PTDM considering OGTT as the reference standard. RESULTS: OGTT identified 32 (26.2%) patients with PTDM, whereas A1C≥6.5% (48 mmol/mol) identified only 16 patients. A1C showed moderate accuracy to detect PTDM in the ROC curve [AUC 0.832 (95% CI 0.740-0.924, p<0.001)]. A1C of 5.8% (40 mmol/mol) was the equilibrium point (sensitivity 75% and specificity 72.2%) and A1C≥6.2% (44 mmol/mol) showed high specificity of 93.3%. CONCLUSIONS: A1C≥6.5% (48 mmol/mol) is not enough to be used alone in the diagnosis of PTDM. The combined use of A1C cut-off points of ≤5.8% (40 mmol/mol) and ≥6.2% (44 mmol/mol) would reduce the number of OGTT by 85%. The use of an algorithm with A1C test in combination with FPG and/or 2h-PG proved to be the most efficient strategy to diagnose or rule out PTDM.