Skip to main content
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes
    • Diabetes Care
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care, abridged
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care
  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • My Cart
  • Follow ada on Twitter
  • RSS
  • Visit ada on Facebook
Diabetes Spectrum

Advanced Search

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care, Abridged
  • Browse
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • COVID-19 Article Collection
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care, Abridged
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
  • More from ADA
    • Diabetes
    • Diabetes Care
    • Clinical Diabetes
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care, abridged
    • ADA Scientific Sessions Abstracts
    • BMJ Open Diabetes Research & Care

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Diabetes Spectrum
  • Home
  • Current
    • Current Issue
    • Online Ahead of Print
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care, Abridged
  • Browse
    • Issue Archive
    • Saved Searches
    • COVID-19 Article Collection
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care
    • ADA Standards of Medical Care, Abridged
  • Info
    • About the Journal
    • About the Editors
    • ADA Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
    • Guidance for Reviewers
  • Reprints/Reuse
  • Advertising
  • Subscriptions
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions and Site Licenses
    • Access Institutional Usage Reports
    • Purchase Single Issues
  • Alerts
    • E­mail Alerts
    • RSS Feeds
  • Podcasts
    • Diabetes Core Update
    • Special Podcast Series: Therapeutic Inertia
    • Special Podcast Series: Influenza Podcasts
    • Special Podcast Series: SGLT2 Inhibitors
    • Special Podcast Series: COVID-19
  • Submit
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Journal Policies
    • Instructions for Authors
From Research to Practice

Glycemic Variability: Looking Beyond the A1C

  1. Tracy S. Tylee, MD and
  2. Dace L. Trence, MD
Diabetes Spectrum 2012 Aug; 25(3): 149-153. https://doi.org/10.2337/diaspect.25.3.149
PreviousNext
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

In Brief

Hyperglycemia in diabetes is known to be associated with both micro- and macrovascular complications. However, multiple studies have raised the question of whether variation in glucose levels, in addition to average glucose, might be a risk factor for these complications. This article summarizes the available data on glycemic variability and how they might contribute to complications in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Hyperglycemia in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes is associated with diabetes complications, including retinopathy, nephropathy, and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Clinicians typically gauge glycemic control with A1C, which reflects the average glucose level over the previous 2–3 months. However, a number of studies1–4 have questioned whether, in addition to average glucose, glucose variability could be an independent risk factor for diabetes complications.

The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT)5 studied the effect of intensive versus conventional insulin therapy on the occurrence and progression of microvascular complications in patients with type 1 diabetes. The results showed a 50% relative risk reduction in retinopathy, nephropathy, and neuropathy in the intensively treated group, which could largely be explained by improvements in A1C. However, when patients from different treatment groups at the same A1C level were compared, those in the conventional group had higher rates of complications, suggesting that factors other than the average blood glucose level were contributing to the risk of complications.6 Subsequent analysis of the DCCT data found this initial finding to be erroneous, and reanalysis found 96% of the treatment group effect was in fact due to A1C.7 However, the authors concluded that total glycemic exposure, a composite of A1C and duration of diabetes, only accounted for 11% of the difference in retinopathy risk for the entire cohort. Thus, factors other than average blood glucose may contribute to the development of diabetes complications.

Patients with similar A1C values can have dramatically different glucose profiles. Some patients have minimal glucose excursions, with little variation from preprandial to postprandial glucose levels and rare hypoglycemia. Other patients have widely fluctuating glucose levels, with frequent episodes of hypoglycemia and marked postprandial increases in blood glucose.

These changes in blood glucose over time reflect glucose variability. Glucose variability can be described as within-day variability, with differences between fasting and postprandial blood glucose values throughout 24 hours, and between-day variability, reflecting differences in blood glucose control from day to day. This glucose variability is not reflected in A1C and thus may represent an additional risk factor for the development of diabetes complications.

Because A1C reflects average glucose level but not variability, measuring glucose variability requires other methods for analysis. A number of measurements have been developed for clinical use. The most practical for outpatient use is the standard deviation (SD) calculated from self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) values. This can be calculated from patients' blood glucose meter downloads and provides a measure of glucose variability over a certain period of time, typically 1–3 months. The software can also provide information about the SD of fasting and postprandial glucose values.

More frequent glucose trends are available with the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices. With more data points, it is possible to calculate the mean amplitude of glucose excursions (MAGE), which is a measure of within-day glucose variability. MAGE reflects the average difference between consecutive blood glucose values that are more than 1 SD from the daily mean. For between-day variability, the mean of daily differences (MODD), which is the average of the difference between blood glucose values measured at the same time on consecutive days, can be used (Table 1).8 There is a high degree of correlation with SD and both MAGE and MODD.9 Whichever method is most convenient for patients and providers can reasonably be used to measure glucose variability.

There remains some controversy as to how glucose variability could contribute to diabetes complications. Multiple in vitro studies with human cell lines have shown that intermittent high glucose levels induce more oxidative stress than continuous high glucose.1 Animal studies have confirmed these studies, showing greater impairment in endothelial function for untreated diabetic rats (continuous high glucose) versus rats having intermittent insulin treatment (variable glycemia).10 Human studies, however, are less clear, with some researchers finding a correlation between oxidative stress and glucose variability,11,12 but others failing to confirm these findings.1,13

Although in vitro data support the oxidative stress theory, in vivo studies leave some uncertainty about how glycemic variability can contribute to diabetes complications. However, multiple studies do support the idea that variations in glucose levels are an important factor in the development of diabetes complications.4

Using different methods for analyzing glucose variability, there is some support for a correlation between glucose variability and diabetes complications in patients with type 1 diabetes. Multiple analyses of the DCCT data have used the seven-point daily glucose profiles to measure within-day glucose variability using SD and MAGE.14,15 They found no relationship between glucose variability and microvascular complications during the initial DCCT or during 4 years of follow-up.16 However, in this same population, when glucose variability was measured as the SD of A1C during the 9-year follow-up period, there was a significant relationship with the development of both retinopathy and nephropathy.17 This suggests that long-term glucose variability, over months to years, may be a more important risk for development of microvascular complications than blood glucose variability within a given day.

The relationship between glucose variability and neuropathy has also been looked at by several groups. Analysis of the DCCT dataset found no relationship between same-day glucose variability and neuropathy, whether measured by MAGE or SD.18 Another small study of patients with neuropathy19 similarly did not find an association between MAGE and onset or progression of neuropathy. However, patients who suffered from painful neuropathy had more frequent glucose excursions, suggesting a relationship between glycemic variability and pain symptoms. In a separate study looking at long-term glucose variability reported as the SD of 4-week blood glucose data,20 glucose variability was predictive of the prevalence of peripheral neuropathy during 11 years of follow-up. There was no relationship with retinopathy or nephropathy. These studies again suggest that it is not the glucose variability in a given day, but rather variability over time that is a risk factor for microvascular and neuropathic complications of diabetes.

Although there have been many studies looking at microvascular complications and glucose variability in patients with type 1 diabetes, there are few data to suggest a relationship between glucose variability and CVD in these patients. Analysis of the DCCT data showed no relationship between within-day glucose variation and cardiovascular events.21 Another study22 found no relationship between within-day glucose variability and arterial stiffness, a marker for cardiovascular risk. A third study23 looked at coronary calcium scores as a marker for CVD. The researchers found glucose variability over 3–5 days of CGM, measured by SD, was positively associated with coronary artery calcium score in men with type 1 diabetes. There was no association for women. More research is needed to clarify the relationship between glucose variability in type 1 diabetes and CVD.

Among patients with type 2 diabetes, there is more evidence to support a relationship between both fasting and postprandial glucose variability and cardiovascular risk. In a study of 300 patients with type 2 diabetes who presented with chest pain,24 within-day glucose variability was associated with the presence and severity of coronary artery disease. Postprandial glucose excursions have been found to be associated with increased carotid intima media thickness (CIMT),25 as well as cardiovascular events.26 Variability of fasting plasma glucose in elderly patients (> 75 years of age) with type 2 diabetes was linked to an increase in overall mortality and specifically predicted cardiovascular death.27,28 A similar analysis of younger patients, aged 56–74 years, found that variability of fasting glucose was an independent predictor of total and cardiovascular mortality during the subsequent 10 years among this population with type 2 diabetes.29 Together, these studies suggest that glycemic variability is an independent risk factor for the development of atherosclerosis, but the mechanism remains unclear.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 1.

Measurement of Glycemic Variability

With respect to microvascular complications and type 2 diabetes, there are conflicting results regarding the relationship to glucose variability. One study found that fasting glucose variability did predict the development of retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes during 5 years of follow-up.30 A second group, looking at development of retinopathy during 30–40 years of follow-up, confirmed the relationship between fasting glucose variability and both nonproliferative and proliferative retinopathy.31,32 A third group, however, found that only the magnitude of hyperglycemia, and not variability, predicted the development or progression of retinopathy during the subsequent 4 years.33 This study, however, looked at an elderly population with an average duration of diabetes of 20 years during 4 years of follow-up, whereas the previous studies included younger patients with shorter durations of diabetes, making it difficult to compare the results of the different studies. The effects of glucose variability on nephropathy and neuropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes are not well described.

Although there have not been any interventional studies looking at the effects of decreasing glucose variability on outcomes in patients with type 1 diabetes, there have been several studies looking at cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. A meta-analysis34 of seven studies looking at the effects of acarbose, which decreases postprandial glucose excursions, on cardiovascular outcomes found a significant decrease in the incidence of myocardial infarction with a minimum of 52 weeks of acarbose treatment (range 52–164 weeks). Another study35 using repaglinide to decrease postprandial glucose versus glyburide, which decreases fasting plasma glucose, showed a decrease in CIMT in the repaglinide group, despite similar improvements in A1C in both groups. Yet another study36 failed to find an effect of postprandial versus fasting glycemia targets in preventing CVD, but this study failed to achieve its specified blood glucose targets or event rate, so it may not have been properly powered to detect a difference. Larger clinical studies are needed to determine whether decreasing glucose variability will improve clinical outcomes.

In addition to the micro- and macrovascular complications of diabetes, glycemic variability may also affect psychological outcomes. One small study37 of patients with type 1 diabetes found high glucose values (> 180 mg/dl) to be associated with negative mood ratings, including tension, anhedonia, and decreased arousal, although no association was seen with between-day glucose variability. Another study38 of 60 patients with type 2 diabetes found that negative mood (depression, anxiety) and cognitive symptoms (difficulty concentrating, slowed thinking) were associated with a change in blood glucose after a meal, suggesting that within-day glucose variability can negatively affect an individual's mood and psychological well-being.

Within-day glucose variability is also tied to hypoglycemia in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.39,40 This includes asymptomatic hypoglycemia,41 which can have a significant impact on a patient's daily life. These studies suggest that glycemic variability not only has the potential to affect long-term vascular complications, but also can affect quality of life on a day-to-day basis.

A1C testing remains the standard of care for managing diabetes, but there is growing evidence that A1C does not reflect the complete picture. Glycemic variability is another factor that likely contributes to complications of diabetes, including negative effects on mood and cognition, as well as the risk of hypoglycemia. Although there are not yet enough data to offer guidelines for glycemic variability, a good rule of thumb is an SD that is less than half of the average blood glucose level. At this level, both hyper- and hypoglycemia are minimized. It remains unclear whether interventions to decrease glycemic variability lead to improved outcomes, but clinicians should be aware of glycemic variability in managing their patients. It is important to recognize that despite having a “normal” A1C, patients may not have optimal control of their diabetes, as illustrated by the following case.

Case Study

You receive your “report card” from an oversight insurance management agency group. The report includes your patient A, a 56-year-old woman with type 2 diabetes with an A1C of 7.2%. The report also includes patient B, a 56-year-old woman with an A1C of 6.6%. Patient A has an average glucose on glucose meter download of 150 mg/dl over the past month, with an SD of 36 mg/dl. Patient B also has an average glucose on the past month's download of 150 mg/dl, but her SD is 100 mg/dl. Her family calls you almost monthly to report an incident of hypoglycemia requiring assistance and to say they are quite concerned about leaving her alone at any time of the day because she is unable to feel symptoms of hypoglycemia. The oversight insurance company commends you on the A1C of 6.6%, but urges you to be more aggressive with your patient with the A1C of 7.2%.

Which patient has the better glucose control? And which patient might have fewer glycemic sequellae? Which patient is likely to have less hypoglycemia and to feel better?

In patient B, with the lower A1C of 6.6%, the blood glucose meter download shows a considerable amount of glucose variability, with a high SD. This suggests an extensive glucose range, with frequent hypoglycemia and episodes of hyperglycemia. The patient reports fatigue and depression, and her family expresses concerns about her safety. In addition, patient B may be at greater risk for cardiovascular mortality related to glycemic variability, despite having the lower A1C.

Patient A has an A1C higher than the “ideal” A1C target. However, her glycemic variability is much less than for patient B. She has infrequent hypoglycemia, which is easily recognized and treated. Her quality of life is less affected by her diabetes, and she is less likely to suffer long-term complications. Despite having the lower A1C, patient A is suffering more adverse effects from her diabetes, in large part because of her increased glycemic variability.

Although A1C is the current standard for defining optimal glycemic control, it is clear that not all A1Cs are equal. Glycemic variability is another factor clinicians should consider when managing patients' diabetes because it could affect not only cardiovascular and microvascular outcomes, but perhaps more importantly for patients, quality of life.

Footnotes

  • Tracy S. Tylee, MD, is a senior fellow, and Dace L. Trence, MD, is an associate professor of medicine in the Division of Metabolism, Endocrinology, and Nutrition at the University of Washington in Seattle.

  • American Diabetes Association(R) Inc., 2012

References

  1. ↵
    1. Siegelaar SE,
    2. Holleman F,
    3. Hoekstra JB,
    4. DeVries JH
    : Glucose variability; does it matter? Endocr Rev 31:171–182, 2010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    1. Kilpatrick ES
    : Arguments for and against the role of glucose variability in the development of diabetes complications. J Diabetes Sci Technol 3:649–655, 2009
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Kilpatrick ES,
    2. Rigby AS,
    3. Atkin SL
    : For debate: glucose variability and diabetes complication risk: we need to know the answer. Diabet Med 27:868–871, 2010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Nalysnyk L,
    2. Hernandez-Medina M,
    3. Krishnarajah G
    : Glycaemic variability and complications in patients with diabetes mellitus: evidence from a systematic review of the literature. Diabetes Obes Metab 12:288–298, 2010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. DCCT Research Group
    : The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 329:977–986, 1993
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  4. ↵
    1. DCCT Research Group
    : The relationship of glycemic exposure (HbA1c) to the risk of development and progression of retinopathy in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Diabetes 44:968–983, 1995
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. Lachin JM,
    2. Genuth S,
    3. Nathan DM,
    4. Zinman B,
    5. Rutledge BN,
    6. Group DER
    : Effect of glycemic exposure on the risk of microvascular complications in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial—revisited. Diabetes 57:995–1001, 2008
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Monnier L,
    2. Colette C,
    3. Owens DR
    : Glycemic variability: the third component of the dysglycemia in diabetes. Is it important? How to measure it? J Diabetes Sci Technol 2:1094–1100, 2008
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. Rodbard D
    : Glycemic variability: measurement and utility in clinical medicine and research—one viewpoint. Diabetes Technol Ther 13:1077–1080, 2011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Horvath EM,
    2. Benko R,
    3. Kiss L,
    4. Muranyi M,
    5. Pek T,
    6. Fekete K,
    7. Barany T,
    8. Somlai A,
    9. Csordas A,
    10. Szabo C
    : Rapid ‘glycaemic swings’ induce nitrosative stress, activate poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase and impair endothelial function in a rat model of diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia 52:952–961, 2009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. ↵
    1. Monnier L,
    2. Mas E,
    3. Ginet C,
    4. Michel F,
    5. Villon L,
    6. Cristol JP,
    7. Colette C
    : Activation of oxidative stress by acute glucose fluctuations compared with sustained chronic hyperglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. JAMA 295:1681–1687, 2006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  10. ↵
    1. Ceriello A,
    2. Esposito K,
    3. Piconi L,
    4. Ihnat MA,
    5. Thorpe JE,
    6. Testa R,
    7. Boemi M,
    8. Giugliano D
    : Oscillating glucose is more deleterious to endothelial function and oxidative stress than mean glucose in normal and type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes 57:1349–1354, 2008
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    1. Wentholt IM,
    2. Kulik W,
    3. Michels RP,
    4. Hoekstra JB,
    5. DeVries JH
    : Glucose fluctuations and activation of oxidative stress in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetologia 51:183–190, 2008
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  12. ↵
    1. Kilpatrick ES,
    2. Rigby AS,
    3. Atkin SL
    : The effect of glucose variability on the risk of microvascular complications in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 29:1486–1490, 2006
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    1. Service FJ,
    2. O'Brien PC
    : The relation of glycaemia to the risk of development and progression of retinopathy in the Diabetic Control and Complications Trial. Diabetologia 44:1215–1220, 2001
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  14. ↵
    1. Kilpatrick ES,
    2. Rigby AS,
    3. Atkin SL
    : Effect of glucose variability on the long-term risk of microvascular complications in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care 32:1901–1903, 2009
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  15. ↵
    1. Kilpatrick ES,
    2. Rigby AS,
    3. Atkin SL
    : A1C variability and the risk of microvascular complications in type 1 diabetes: data from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Diabetes Care 31:2198–2202, 2008
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    1. Siegelaar SE,
    2. Kilpatrick ES,
    3. Rigby AS,
    4. Atkin SL,
    5. Hoekstra JB,
    6. Devries JH
    : Glucose variability does not contribute to the development of peripheral and autonomic neuropathy in type 1 diabetes: data from the DCCT. Diabetologia 52:2229–2232, 2009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. ↵
    1. Oyibo SO,
    2. Prasad YD,
    3. Jackson NJ,
    4. Jude EB,
    5. Boulton AJ
    : The relationship between blood glucose excursions and painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy: a pilot study. Diabet Med 19:870–873, 2002
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  18. ↵
    1. Bragd J,
    2. Adamson U,
    3. Backlund LB,
    4. Lins PE,
    5. Moberg E,
    6. Oskarsson P
    : Can glycaemic variability, as calculated from blood glucose self-monitoring, predict the development of complications in type 1 diabetes over a decade? Diabetes Metab 34:612–616, 2008
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  19. ↵
    1. Kilpatrick ES,
    2. Rigby AS,
    3. Atkin SL
    : Mean blood glucose compared with HbA1c in the prediction of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetologia 51:365–371, 2008
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  20. ↵
    1. Gordin D,
    2. Ronnback M,
    3. Forsblom C,
    4. Makinen V,
    5. Saraheimo M,
    6. Groop PH
    : Glucose variability, blood pressure and arterial stiffness in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 80:e4–e7, 2008
    OpenUrlPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Snell-Bergeon JK,
    2. Roman R,
    3. Rodbard D,
    4. Garg S,
    5. Maahs DM,
    6. Schauer IE,
    7. Bergman BC,
    8. Kinney GL,
    9. Rewers M
    : Glycaemic variability is associated with coronary artery calcium in men with type 1 diabetes: the Coronary Artery Calcification in Type 1 Diabetes study. Diabet Med 27:1436–1442, 2010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Su G,
    2. Mi S,
    3. Tao H,
    4. Li Z,
    5. Yang H,
    6. Zheng H,
    7. Zhou Y,
    8. Ma C
    : Association of glycemic variability and the presence and severity of coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes [article online]. Cardiovasc Diabetol 10:19, 2011. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3056765/?tool=pubmed
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Esposito K,
    2. Ciotola M,
    3. Carleo D,
    4. Schisano B,
    5. Sardelli L,
    6. Di Tommaso D,
    7. Misso L,
    8. Saccomanno F,
    9. Ceriello A,
    10. Giugliano D
    : Post-meal glucose peaks at home associate with carotid intima-media thickness in type 2 diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 93:1345–1350, 2008
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Cavalot F,
    2. Petrelli A,
    3. Traversa M,
    4. Bonomo K,
    5. Fiora E,
    6. Conti M,
    7. Anfossi G,
    8. Costa G,
    9. Trovati M
    : Postprandial blood glucose is a stronger predictor of cardiovascular events than fasting blood glucose in type 2 diabetes mellitus, particularly in women: lessons from the San Luigi Gonzaga Diabetes Study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 91:813–819, 2006
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  25. ↵
    1. Muggeo M,
    2. Verlato G,
    3. Bonora E,
    4. Ciani F,
    5. Moghetti P,
    6. Eastman R,
    7. Crepaldi G,
    8. de Marco R
    : Long-term instability of fasting plasma glucose predicts mortality in elderly NIDDM patients: the Verona Diabetes Study. Diabetologia 38:672–679, 1995
    OpenUrlPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Muggeo M,
    2. Verlato G,
    3. Bonora E,
    4. Zoppini G,
    5. Corbellini M,
    6. de Marco R
    : Long-term instability of fasting plasma glucose, a novel predictor of cardiovascular mortality in elderly patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus: the Verona Diabetes Study. Circulation 96:1750–1754, 1997
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. ↵
    1. Muggeo M,
    2. Zoppini G,
    3. Bonora E,
    4. Brun E,
    5. Bonadonna RC,
    6. Moghetti P,
    7. Verlato G
    : Fasting plasma glucose variability predicts 10-year survival of type 2 diabetic patients: the Verona Diabetes Study. Diabetes Care 23:45–50, 2000
    OpenUrlAbstract
  28. ↵
    1. Gimeno-Orna JA,
    2. Castro-Alonso FJ,
    3. Boned-Juliani B,
    4. Lou-Arnal LM
    : Fasting plasma glucose variability as a risk factor of retinopathy in Type 2 diabetic patients. J Diabetes Complications 17:78–81, 2003
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. Takao T,
    2. Ide T,
    3. Yanagisawa H,
    4. Kikuchi M,
    5. Kawazu S,
    6. Matsuyama Y
    : The effect of fasting plasma glucose variability on the risk of retinopathy in type 2 diabetic patients: retrospective long-term follow-up. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 89:296–302, 2010
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. ↵
    1. Takao T,
    2. Ide T,
    3. Yanagisawa H,
    4. Kikuchi M,
    5. Kawazu S,
    6. Matsuyama Y
    : The effects of fasting plasma glucose variability and time-dependent glycemic control on the long-term risk of retinopathy in type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 91:e40–e42, 2011
    OpenUrlPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Zoppini G,
    2. Verlato G,
    3. Targher G,
    4. Casati S,
    5. Gusson E,
    6. Biasi V,
    7. Perrone F,
    8. Bonora E,
    9. Muggeo M
    : Is fasting glucose variability a risk factor for retinopathy in people with type 2 diabetes? Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 19:334–339, 2009
    OpenUrlPubMed
  32. ↵
    1. Hanefeld M,
    2. Cagatay M,
    3. Petrowitsch T,
    4. Neuser D,
    5. Petzinna D,
    6. Rupp M
    : Acarbose reduces the risk for myocardial infarction in type 2 diabetic patients: meta-analysis of seven long-term studies. Eur Heart J 25:10–16, 2004
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. ↵
    1. Esposito K,
    2. Giugliano D,
    3. Nappo F,
    4. Marfella R,
    5. Campanian Postprandial Hyperglycemia Study Group
    : Regression of carotid atherosclerosis by control of postprandial hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Circulation 110:214–219, 2004
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. ↵
    1. Raz I,
    2. Wilson PW,
    3. Strojek K,
    4. Kowalska I,
    5. Bozikov V,
    6. Gitt AK,
    7. Jermendy G,
    8. Campaigne BN,
    9. Kerr L,
    10. Milicevic Z,
    11. Jacober SJ
    : Effects of prandial versus fasting glycemia on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: the HEART2D trial. Diabetes Care 32:381–386, 2009
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. ↵
    1. Hermanns N,
    2. Scheff C,
    3. Kulzer B,
    4. Weyers P,
    5. Pauli P,
    6. Kubiak T,
    7. Haak T
    : Association of glucose levels and glucose variability with mood in type 1 diabetic patients. Diabetologia 50:930–933, 2007
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Cox DJ,
    2. McCall A,
    3. Kovatchev B,
    4. Sarwat S,
    5. Ilag LL,
    6. Tan MH
    : Effects of blood glucose rate of changes on perceived mood and cognitive symptoms in insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 30:2001–2002, 2007
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  37. ↵
    1. Niskanen L,
    2. Virkamaki A,
    3. Hansen JB,
    4. Saukkonen T
    : Fasting plasma glucose variability as a marker of nocturnal hypoglycemia in diabetes: evidence from the PREDICTIVE study. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 86:e15–e18, 2009
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. ↵
    1. Kilpatrick ES,
    2. Rigby AS,
    3. Goode K,
    4. Atkin SL
    : Relating mean blood glucose and glucose variability to the risk of multiple episodes of hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes. Diabetologia 50:2553–2561, 2007
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  39. ↵
    1. Monnier L,
    2. Wojtusciszyn A,
    3. Colette C,
    4. Owens D
    : The contribution of glucose variability to asymptomatic hypoglycemia in persons with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther 13:813–818, 2011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
PreviousNext
Back to top
Diabetes Spectrum: 25 (3)

In this Issue

August 2012, 25(3)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by Author
Sign up to receive current issue alerts
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about Diabetes Spectrum.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Glycemic Variability: Looking Beyond the A1C
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Diabetes Spectrum
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the Diabetes Spectrum web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Glycemic Variability: Looking Beyond the A1C
Tracy S. Tylee, Dace L. Trence
Diabetes Spectrum Aug 2012, 25 (3) 149-153; DOI: 10.2337/diaspect.25.3.149

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Add to Selected Citations
Share

Glycemic Variability: Looking Beyond the A1C
Tracy S. Tylee, Dace L. Trence
Diabetes Spectrum Aug 2012, 25 (3) 149-153; DOI: 10.2337/diaspect.25.3.149
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Case Study
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Management of Diabetes Across the Life Spectrum
  • About Medha N. Munshi, MD: Guest Editor, Management of Diabetes Across the Life Spectrum
  • Challenges and Strategies for Managing Diabetes in the Elderly in Long-Term Care Settings
Show more From Research to Practice

Similar Articles

Navigate

  • Current Issue
  • Papers in Press
  • Archives
  • Submit
  • Subscribe
  • Email Alerts
  • RSS Feeds

More Information

  • About the Journal
  • Instructions for Authors
  • Journal Policies
  • Reprints and Permissions
  • Advertising
  • Privacy Policy: ADA Journals
  • Copyright Notice/Public Access Policy
  • Contact Us

Other ADA Resources

  • Diabetes
  • Diabetes Care
  • Clinical Diabetes
  • Scientific Sessions Abstracts
  • Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes
  • BMJ Open - Diabetes Research & Care
  • Professional Books
  • Diabetes Forecast

 

  • DiabetesJournals.org
  • Diabetes Core Update
  • ADA's DiabetesPro
  • ADA Member Directory
  • Diabetes.org

© 2021 by the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes Spectrum Print ISSN: 1040-9165, Online ISSN: 1944-7353.