The impact of inter-laboratory glucose bias on the diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus: Comparison of common automated central laboratory methods

被引:4
|
作者
Scheuer, Cathrine Munk [1 ]
Tvarno, Casper Duevang [2 ]
Gils, Charlotte [3 ]
Ravn, Julie Dahl [3 ]
McIntyre, H. David [4 ]
Jensen, Dorte Moller [5 ,6 ,7 ]
Damm, Peter [8 ,9 ]
Lauenborg, Jeannet Kepp Bruun [2 ,10 ]
Clausen, Tine Dalsgaard [1 ,8 ]
Overgaard, Martin [3 ,7 ]
机构
[1] Univ Copenhagen, Nordsjaellands Hosp, Dept Gynaecol & Obstet, Dyrehavevej 29, DK-3400 Hillerod, Denmark
[2] Nykobing Falster Sygehus, Dept Gynaecol Obstet & Paediat, Fjordvej 15, DK-4800 Nykobing, Denmark
[3] Odense Univ Hosp, Dept Clin Biochem, JB Winslows Vej 4, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark
[4] Univ Queensland, Fac Med, Mater Res, Raymond Terrace,Level 3 Aubigny Pl, South Brisbane, Qld 4101, Australia
[5] Odense Univ Hosp, Steno Diabet Ctr Odense, Klovervaenget 10, DK-5000 Odense C, Denmark
[6] Odense Univ Hosp, Dept Gynecol & Obstet, JB Winslows Vej 4, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark
[7] Univ Southern Denmark, Dept Clin Res, JB Winslows Vej 19-3, DK-5000 Odense, Denmark
[8] Rigshosp, Ctr Pregnant Women Diabet, Dept Obstet, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen East, Denmark
[9] Univ Copenhagen, Dept Clin Med, Blegdamsvej 3b 33 5, DK-2200 Copenhagen, Denmark
[10] Copenhagen Univ Hosp Herlev, Dept Gynaecol & Obstet, Borgmester Ib Juuls Vej 11, DK-2730 Herlev, Denmark
关键词
Bias; Gestational diabetes mellitus; Glucose; Inter-laboratory; OGTT; Venous sampling; BLOOD-GLUCOSE;
D O I
10.1016/j.cca.2023.117414
中图分类号
R446 [实验室诊断]; R-33 [实验医学、医学实验];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
Background and aims: The diagnosis of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is based exclusively on glucose measurements, which are highly influenced by pre-analytical and analytical factors. Therefore, poor agreement across laboratories may affect the prevalence of GDM. We aimed to determine the inter-laboratory bias of glucose measurements and the impact on GDM prevalence.Material and methods: A prospective cohort study of women (n = 110) referred for second-trimester GDM diagnostics using a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test. Maternal glucose was assessed from venous plasma at fasting, 1 h and 2 h. Venous blood were collected in Fluoride Citrate tubes and frozen. Samples were analyzed at five central laboratories using four different automated glucose Hexokinase methods and GDM prevalence was evaluated according to WHO2013 diagnostic criteria.Results: Maximum inter-laboratory bias was 0.19, 0.30 and 0.27 mmol/L in fasting, 1 h and 2 h samples, respectively. GDM prevalence ranged 30.0-41.1% across laboratories. Conclusion: Inter-laboratory bias for mean venous glucose was low and within desirable limits. Nonetheless, the impact on GDM prevalence was considerable, which may inappropriately affect clinical practice.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 4 条
  • [1] Effect of a common reference plasma on the inter-laboratory variation of the measurement of total and free protein S: a collaborative study of the Dutch Working Group on Haemostasis Laboratory Diagnosis
    Meijer, P
    Verbruggen, HW
    De Weerd, B
    Den Dool, EJ
    Van Oerle, R
    SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL & LABORATORY INVESTIGATION, 2002, 62 (02) : 149 - 157
  • [2] Comparison of Venous and Capillary Sampling in Oral Glucose Testing for the Diagnosis of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: A Diagnostic Accuracy Cross-Sectional Study Using Accu-Chek Inform II
    Nevander, Sofia
    Landberg, Eva
    Blomberg, Marie
    Ekman, Bertil
    Lilliecreutz, Caroline
    DIAGNOSTICS, 2020, 10 (12)
  • [3] Prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus in the first trimester, comparison of fasting plasma glucose, two-step and one-step methods: a prospective randomized controlled trial
    Yeral, M. Ilkin
    Ozgu-Erdinc, A. Seval
    Uygur, Dilek
    Seckin, K. Doga
    Karsli, M. Fatih
    Danisman, A. Nuri
    ENDOCRINE, 2014, 46 (03) : 512 - 518
  • [4] Prediction of gestational diabetes mellitus in the first trimester, comparison of fasting plasma glucose, two-step and one-step methods: a prospective randomized controlled trial
    M. Ilkin Yeral
    A. Seval Ozgu-Erdinc
    Dilek Uygur
    K. Doga Seckin
    M. Fatih Karsli
    A. Nuri Danisman
    Endocrine, 2014, 46 : 512 - 518