BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that HbA1c is an important predictor of the glycometabolic state of patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). OBJECTIVE: We aimed at comparing the results of HbA1c concentrations obtained by 2 different methods in patients with AMI. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a first study, HbA1c was measured in all patients consecutively hospitalized for AMI, during a 6 month period using the HPLC method and the DCA 2000 device in the biochemistry laboratory. In a second study, HbA1c measured by the DCA 2000 device in the intensive care unit was compared with HbA1c determined by HPLC in the biochemistry laboratory in a similar sample of patients. In patients without personal history of diabetes, those patients with HbA1c > 6.5% (HPLC method), were classified as possible diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 146 patients were included (119 males, 27 females; mean age: 63 +/- 15 years). Twenty-seven of the patients had a personal history of diabetes. HbA1c determined by 2 techniques were highly correlated (r = 0.939, P < 0.0001). The mean of the differences (Bland and Altman analysis) was 0.4 +/- 0.3%. Compared with the HPLC method, the sensitivity of DCA 2000 device for the detection of possible diabetes was 81.8 +/- 11.6 and the specificity was 99.1 +/- 0.9%. The diagnostic accuracy of DCA method was 97.5 +/- 1.4%. In the second study, the HbA1c concentrations of 21 additional subjects, determined in an intensive care unit, were not different from the first 21 patients of the first study. CONCLUSIONS: HbA1c can be effectively determined using the DCA 2000 device. This method is reliable and easy to be implemented in an intensive care unit.
BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that HbA1c is an important predictor of the glycometabolic state of patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). OBJECTIVE: We aimed at comparing the results of HbA1c concentrations obtained by 2 different methods in patients with AMI. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a first study, HbA1c was measured in all patients consecutively hospitalized for AMI, during a 6 month period using the HPLC method and the DCA 2000 device in the biochemistry laboratory. In a second study, HbA1c measured by the DCA 2000 device in the intensive care unit was compared with HbA1c determined by HPLC in the biochemistry laboratory in a similar sample of patients. In patients without personal history of diabetes, those patients with HbA1c > 6.5% (HPLC method), were classified as possible diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 146 patients were included (119 males, 27 females; mean age: 63 +/- 15 years). Twenty-seven of the patients had a personal history of diabetes. HbA1c determined by 2 techniques were highly correlated (r = 0.939, P < 0.0001). The mean of the differences (Bland and Altman analysis) was 0.4 +/- 0.3%. Compared with the HPLC method, the sensitivity of DCA 2000 device for the detection of possible diabetes was 81.8 +/- 11.6 and the specificity was 99.1 +/- 0.9%. The diagnostic accuracy of DCA method was 97.5 +/- 1.4%. In the second study, the HbA1c concentrations of 21 additional subjects, determined in an intensive care unit, were not different from the first 21 patients of the first study. CONCLUSIONS: HbA1c can be effectively determined using the DCA 2000 device. This method is reliable and easy to be implemented in an intensive care unit.