METHODS: Data on demography, diabetes status, management and complications were collected via medical records, interview and laboratory assessments. HbA(1c) was analysed by a central laboratory prospectively.
RESULTS: Patient profile was similar in the 1998 (N = 21,838) and 2003 cohorts (N = 15,549): 95% were diagnosed as type 2 diabetes mellitus and were obese (BMI approximately 25 kg/m(2)). Glycaemic control was unsatisfactory in many patients (mean HbA(1c) approximately 8%; fasting glucose approximately 9 mmol/L). Lipids were well-controlled but hypertension was not. The incidence of neuropathy ( approximately 33%) and cataract ( approximately 27%) were high. The majority ( approximately 71%) of patients in both cohorts were treated with oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) monotherapy; approximately 24% were on insulin therapy. Approximately half of the 2003 cohort reported a healthy state of well-being. Quality of life did not appear to have suffered as a result of having diabetes. However, many patients were worried about hypoglycaemic risk (53.9%) or worsening of diabetes (45.8%) and insulin initiation (64.5%).
CONCLUSIONS: Although both cohorts were separate cross-sectional studies of diabetes management status in Asia, the results showed that the demography profile, glycaemic control and cardiovascular risk factors were remarkably similar in both cohorts 5 years after the first survey. More concerted efforts are needed to increase diabetes awareness and education.
Material and methods: One hundred and ten (110) women with unexplained RM were included in this study. Participants were subjected to diagnostic hysteroscopy for uterine cavity, and endometrium evaluation. The diagnosis of CE during hysteroscopic examination was based on CE-related hysteroscopic signs (micro-polyps, stromal edema, and/or hyperemia). At the end of hysteroscopy, an endometrial biopsy was taken from participants for culture, and immunohistochemical (IHC) staining. Collected data were analyzed to assess the relation between CE and RM and the accuracy of hysteroscopy in diagnosing CE.
Results: The prevalence of CE in women with RM was 31.8% using CE-related hysteroscopic signs, while it was 38.2% using IHC staining and endometrial cultures (p = 0.4). CE-related hysteroscopic signs had 64.1% sensitivity, 85.9% specificity, 71.4% positive predictive value (PPV), 81.3% negative predictive value (NPV), and 78.2% overall accuracy in diagnosing CE. Most cases of CE (> 81%) were caused by Mycoplasma and common pathogens.
Conclusions: The prevalence of CE in women with RM was 31.8% using CE-related hysteroscopic signs, while it was 38.2% using IHC staining and endometrial cultures. CE-related hysteroscopic signs had 64.1% sensitivity, 85.9% specificity, 71.4% PPV, 81.3% NPV, and 78.2% overall accuracy in diagnosing CE. Most cases of CE (> 81%) were caused by Mycoplasma and common pathogens.