Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Jan;34(1):145-50.
doi: 10.2337/dc10-1206. Epub 2010 Oct 26.

Glycemic thresholds for diabetes-specific retinopathy: implications for diagnostic criteria for diabetes

Affiliations

Glycemic thresholds for diabetes-specific retinopathy: implications for diagnostic criteria for diabetes

Stephen Colagiuri et al. Diabetes Care. 2011 Jan.

Erratum in

  • Diabetes Care. 2011 Aug;34(8):1888

Abstract

Objective: To re-evaluate the relationship between glycemia and diabetic retinopathy.

Research design and methods: We conducted a data-pooling analysis of nine studies from five countries with 44,623 participants aged 20-79 years with gradable retinal photographs. The relationship between diabetes-specific retinopathy (defined as moderate or more severe retinopathy) and three glycemic measures (fasting plasma glucose [FPG; n = 41,411], 2-h post oral glucose load plasma glucose [2-h PG; n = 21,334], and A1C [n = 28,010]) was examined.

Results: When diabetes-specific retinopathy was plotted against continuous glycemic measures, a curvilinear relationship was observed for FPG and A1C. Diabetes-specific retinopathy prevalence was low for FPG <6.0 mmol/l and A1C <6.0% but increased above these levels. Based on vigintile (20 groups with equal numbers) distributions, glycemic thresholds for diabetes-specific retinopathy were observed over the range of 6.4-6.8 mmol/l for FPG, 9.8-10.6 mmol/l for 2-h PG, and 6.3-6.7% for A1C. Thresholds for diabetes-specific retinopathy from receiver-operating characteristic curve analyses were 6.6 mmol/l for FPG, 13.0 mmol/l for 2-h PG, and 6.4% for A1C.

Conclusions: This study broadens the evidence based on diabetes diagnostic criteria. A narrow threshold range for diabetes-specific retinopathy was identified for FPG and A1C but not for 2-h PG. The combined analyses suggest that the current diabetes diagnostic level for FPG could be lowered to 6.5 mmol/l and that an A1C of 6.5% is a suitable alternative diagnostic criterion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Prevalence of diabetes-specific retinopathy (moderate or more severe retinopathy) with 95% confidence intervals, number of retinopathy cases, and participants within each interval by 0.5 unit intervals for FPG and 2-h PG, and A1C.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Prevalence of diabetes-specific retinopathy (moderate or more severe retinopathy) by vigintiles of the distribution of FPG, 2-h PG, and A1C.

References

    1. World Health Organization and International Diabetes Federation Definition and diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and intermediate hyperglycemia: report of a WHO/IDF consultation. World Health Organization: Geneva, 2006
    1. The Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus Report of the expert committee on the diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 1997;20:1183–1197 - PubMed
    1. Wong TY, Liew G, Tapp RJ, Schmidt MI, Wang JJ, Mitchell P, Klein R, Klein BE, Zimmet P, Shaw J: Relation between fasting glucose and retinopathy for diagnosis of diabetes: three population-based cross-sectional studies. Lancet 2008;371:736–743 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ito C, Maeda R, Ishida S, Harada H, Inoue N, Sasaki H: Importance of OGTT for diagnosing diabetes mellitus based on prevalence and incidence of retinopathy. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2000;49:181–186 - PubMed
    1. Tapp RJ, Zimmer PZ, Harper CA, de Courten MP, McCarty DJ, Balkau B, Taylor HR, Welbourn TA, Shaw JE: AusDiab Study Group Diagnostic thresholds for diabetes: the association of retinopathy and albuminuria with glycaemia. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2006;73:315–321 - PubMed

Publication types