Dataset Information

Effect of diabetes mellitus type 2 on salivary glucose--a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Early screening of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) is essential for improved prognosis and effective delay of clinical complications. However, testing for high glycemia often requires invasive and painful blood testing, limiting its large-scale applicability. We have combined new, unpublished data with published data comparing salivary glucose levels in type 2 DM patients and controls and/or looked at the correlation between salivary glucose and glycemia/HbA1c to systematically review the effectiveness of salivary glucose to estimate glycemia and HbA1c. We further discuss salivary glucose as a biomarker for large-scale screening of diabetes or developing type 2 DM.

Methods and findings

We conducted a meta-analysis of peer-reviewed published articles that reported data regarding mean salivary glucose levels and/or correlation between salivary glucose levels and glycemia or HbA1c for type 2 DM and non-diabetic individuals and combined them with our own unpublished results. Our global meta-analysis of standardized mean differences on salivary glucose levels shows an overall large positive effect of type 2 DM over salivary glucose (Hedge's g = 1.37). The global correlation coefficient (r) between salivary glucose and glycemia was large (r = 0.49), with subgroups ranging from medium (r = 0.30 in non-diabetics) to very large (r = 0.67 in diabetics). Meta-analysis of the global correlation between salivary glucose and HbA1c showed an overall association of medium strength (r = 0.37).

Conclusions

Our systematic review reports an overall meaningful salivary glucose concentration increase in type 2 DM and a significant overall relationship between salivary glucose concentration and associated glycemia/HbA1c values, with the strength of the correlation increasing for higher glycemia/HbA1c values. These results support the potential of salivary glucose levels as a biomarker for type 2 DM, providing a less painful/invasive method for screening type 2 DM, as well as for monitoring blood glucose levels in large cohorts of DM patients.

SUBMITTER: Mascarenhas P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4098915 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has increased worldwide, including in Saudi Arabia.ObjectiveTo systematically review the available literature and assess the pooled prevalence of T2DM in Saudi Arabia between 2000 and 2020.MethodsObservational studies that reported quantitative estimates of the prevalence of T2DM as their main outcome, included the general population of Saudi Arabia, and were published between 2000-2020 and in English were retrieved using three electronic databases (namely, CINAHL, Medline via PubMed, and Web of Science). Retrieved studies were screened, and relevant data were extracted. The Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal guideline was used to assess the methodological quality of included studies. A random-effects model was used to estimate the prevalence of T2DM.ResultsTwenty-three studies were included in the systematic review, of which 19 were included in the meta-analysis (total pooled population: 258,283). The overall pooled prevalence of T2DM in Saudi Arabia was 16.4% (95% CI: 11.6-17.5). However, there was heterogeneity in the results of the studies [I2 = 99.31%, P < 0.0001] and the summary values varied from 3.18% (95% CI: 1.46-5.95) to 94.34% (95% CI: 89.53-97.38). Although the prevalence of T2DM by age varied across studies, in most studies, it was higher among the older age groups. In addition, the prevalence of diabetes widely varied across the different geographical regions of Saudi Arabia.ConclusionsThis is the first meta-analysis that determined the pooled prevalence of T2DM in Saudi Arabia, and it revealed a high prevalence over the past two decades. However, owing to data collection inconsistencies in the identified studies, neither the modifiable (such as obesity, educational status, emotional support, etc.) nor the non-modifiable (such as gender and age) risk factors of T2DM could be determined, thereby indicating the need for a nationally collective effort in determining these factors.

Project description:BackgroundGlycaemic control in women with diabetes is critical to satisfactory pregnancy outcome. A systematic review of two randomised trials concluded that there was no clear evidence of benefit from very tight versus tight glycaemic control for pregnant women with diabetes.MethodsA systematic review of observational studies addressing miscarriage, congenital malformations and perinatal mortality among pregnant women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes was carried out. Literature searches were performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Cochrane Library. Observational studies with data on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels categorised into poor and optimal control (as defined by the study investigators) were selected. Relative risks and odds ratios were calculated for HbA1c and pregnancy outcomes. Adjusted relative risk estimates per 1-percent decrease in HbA1c were calculated for studies which contained information on mean and standard deviations of HbA1c.ResultsThe review identified thirteen studies which compared poor versus optimal glycaemic control in relation to maternal, fetal and neonatal outcomes. Twelve of these studies reported the outcome of congenital malformations and showed an increased risk with poor glycaemic control, pooled odds ratio 3.44 (95%CI, 2.30 to 5.15). For four of the twelve studies, it was also possible to calculate a relative risk reduction of congenital malformation for each 1-percent decrease in HbA1c, these varied from 0.39 to 0.59. The risk of miscarriage was reported in four studies and was associated with poor glycaemic control, pooled odds ratio 3.23 (95%CI, 1.64 to 6.36). Increased perinatal mortality was also associated with poor glycaemic control, pooled odds ratio 3.03 (95%CI, 1.87 to 4.92) from four studies.ConclusionThis analysis quantifies the increase in adverse pregnancy outcomes in women with diabetes who have poor glycaemic control. Relating percentage risk reduction in HbA1c to relative risk of adverse pregnancy events may be useful in motivating women to achieve optimal control prior to conception.