AIMS: To assess whether adding anthropometric measurements to an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) can help to distinguish between transient and persistent impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). METHODS: From the SLIM project (Study on Lifestyle-Intervention and IGT Maastricht), a study designed to evaluate whether diet and physical activity intervention can improve glucose tolerance in subjects at risk for diabetes, 108 subjects with IGT underwent a repeated OGTT 2-4 months after the initial OGTT. Following the second test, subjects were classified as transient IGT, or persistent IGT. Anthropometric measurements, including body mass index, waist and hip circumference, sagittal and transverse abdominal diameters and skinfold thickness measurements, were done during the second OGTT. RESULTS: Persistent IGT was diagnosed in 47 subjects (44%), transient IGT in 40 (37%), impaired fasting glucose in eight subjects (7%), and diabetes in 13 cases (12%). Two-hour blood glucose levels at the initial OGTT and subscapular skinfold thickness were significantly higher in subjects with persistent IGT (2-h blood glucose 9.8+/-0.1 mmol/l vs. 10.2+/-0.1 mmol/l for transient IGT and persistent IGT, respectively; subscapular skinfold thickness 25.4+/-1.4 mm vs. 29.8+/-1.2 mm for transient IGT and persistent IGT, respectively). After adjustment for age, sex and family history of diabetes mellitus, logistic regression indicated that 2-h blood glucose level during the initial OGTT represented the strongest predictor of persistent IGT (P<0.02), followed by subscapular skinfold thickness (P<0.05). After adjustment for 2-h blood glucose levels during the first OGTT, subscapular skinfold thickness remained significantly associated with persistent IGT (odds ratio 1.84; P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the 2-h blood glucose level, subscapular skinfold thickness was the best predictor of persistent IGT, suggesting that adding simple anthropometric measures to oral glucose tolerance testing may improve the distinction between persistent and transient glucose intolerance.
AIMS: To assess whether adding anthropometric measurements to an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) can help to distinguish between transient and persistent impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). METHODS: From the SLIM project (Study on Lifestyle-Intervention and IGT Maastricht), a study designed to evaluate whether diet and physical activity intervention can improve glucose tolerance in subjects at risk for diabetes, 108 subjects with IGT underwent a repeated OGTT 2-4 months after the initial OGTT. Following the second test, subjects were classified as transient IGT, or persistent IGT. Anthropometric measurements, including body mass index, waist and hip circumference, sagittal and transverse abdominal diameters and skinfold thickness measurements, were done during the second OGTT. RESULTS: Persistent IGT was diagnosed in 47 subjects (44%), transient IGT in 40 (37%), impaired fasting glucose in eight subjects (7%), and diabetes in 13 cases (12%). Two-hour blood glucose levels at the initial OGTT and subscapular skinfold thickness were significantly higher in subjects with persistent IGT (2-h blood glucose 9.8+/-0.1 mmol/l vs. 10.2+/-0.1 mmol/l for transient IGT and persistent IGT, respectively; subscapular skinfold thickness 25.4+/-1.4 mm vs. 29.8+/-1.2 mm for transient IGT and persistent IGT, respectively). After adjustment for age, sex and family history of diabetes mellitus, logistic regression indicated that 2-h blood glucose level during the initial OGTT represented the strongest predictor of persistent IGT (P<0.02), followed by subscapular skinfold thickness (P<0.05). After adjustment for 2-h blood glucose levels during the first OGTT, subscapular skinfold thickness remained significantly associated with persistent IGT (odds ratio 1.84; P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the 2-h blood glucose level, subscapular skinfold thickness was the best predictor of persistent IGT, suggesting that adding simple anthropometric measures to oral glucose tolerance testing may improve the distinction between persistent and transient glucose intolerance.
Authors: S Savastano; A Barbato; C Di Somma; B Guida; G Pizza; L Barrea; S Avallone; M Schiano di Cola; P Strazzullo; A Colao Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2012-07-09 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Andrea Ruiz-Alejos; Rodrigo M Carrillo-Larco; J Jaime Miranda; Robert H Gilman; Liam Smeeth; Antonio Bernabé-Ortiz Journal: Public Health Nutr Date: 2019-06-04 Impact factor: 4.022
Authors: N Patel; K M Godfrey; D Pasupathy; J Levin; A C Flynn; L Hayes; A L Briley; R Bell; D A Lawlor; E Oteng-Ntim; S M Nelson; S C Robson; N Sattar; C Singh; J Wardle; S L White; P T Seed; L Poston Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2017-02-20 Impact factor: 5.095