HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Genuth, S. Articles by Kahn, R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Genuth, S. Articles by Kahn, R. Social Bookmarking                What's this?

A Step Backward—or Is it Forward?

¹ Division of Clinical and Molecular Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
² American Diabetes Association, Alexandria, Virginia

Corresponding author: Saul Genuth, MD, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, OH 44106-4951. E-mail: smg15@cwru.edu

Abbreviations: CVD, cardiovascular disease • FPG, fasting plasma glucose • IFG, impaired fasting glucose • IGT, impaired glucose tolerance

The first 300 words of the full text of this article appear below.

The time may have come—or at least will soon arrive—when the diagnostic categories related to diabetes and its close relatives, impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) and impaired fasting glucose (IFG), should be reconsidered. IGT, IFG, and the combination of the two are now considered pre-diabetes because, compared with normal glucose tolerance, they signal an increased risk of developing diabetes (1). Before 1979, when the National Diabetes Data Group defined IGT (2) and declared it to be an official diagnostic category, one either did or did not have diabetes and nondiagnostic glucose levels were de facto "normal." A middle ground was recognized by some physicians, but it was not enshrined in all epidemiological studies or in clinical practice.

The addition of IFG in 1997 for the purpose of creating a state equivalent to IGT both added to the middle ground and raised awareness and appreciation of intermediate levels of glucose intolerance (3). There was now a distinctive group of individuals whose fasting plasma glucose (FPG) lay between normal (<110 mg/dl) and the new 1997 lower diabetes cut point of 126 mg/dl and who may not meet the IGT criterion of 140–199 mg/dl 2 h after a standard oral glucose load of 75 g (3). A further refinement of IFG in 2003 altered the lower IFG cut point from 110 to 100 mg/dl, a change recommended to make both intermediate states equivalent and to define a more realistic upper limit of normal (4).

Recently, however, more and more studies have demonstrated that at glycemic levels above normal but within the range of either IFG or IGT, there is an increasing risk of crossing the diabetes line (FPG 126 mg/dl and/or a 2-h post–glucose load level of 200 mg/dl) within a few years (. . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				Z. T. Bloomgarden American College of Endocrinology Pre-Diabetes Consensus Conference: Part One Diabetes Care, October 1, 2008; 31(10): 2062 - 2069. [Full Text] [PDF]