Nicolò Diego Borella1 · Antonio Ferramosca2 · Giona Castagna1 · Silvia Ippolito1 · Sara Ceresoli2 · Antonio Taverna1 · Beatrice Sonzogni2 · Roberto Trevisan1,3 · Giuseppe Lepore1
Received: 6 March 2024 / Accepted: 15 October 2024 / Published online: 22 November 2024 © The Author(s) 2024
Abstract
Context Advanced hybrid closed loop (AHCL) systems currently represent the most advanced modality of insulin therapy.
Aim To compare the night-time (from 00 to 07 a.m.) effectiveness in achieving recommended glycemic targets of three dif-ferent AHCL systems in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D).
Methods We retrospectively evaluated 55 adults with T1D (mean age 41±16 years, male 40%, diabetes duration 19.4±11.4 years, BMI 24.1±4.1 kg/m2 ) with similar glycemic control (GMI 7.0–7.4%). Twenty-two participants were using the Minimed 780G system, 18 the Tandem t:slim X2 with Control-IQ system and 15 the DBLG1 system. Continuous glucose monitoring derived metrics and insulin requirement of 14 consecutive nights were
Results All three groups achieved the recommended mean TIR>70%, mean TBR<4%, and mean CV<36% with a similar insulin requirement (Minimed 780G system: TIR 73.9±11.2%, TBR 0.9±1.2%, CV 29±6.7%; Tandem t:slim X2 with Con-trol-IQ system: TIR 74.1±11.1%, TBR 1.1±1.0%, CV 34.5±6.6%; DBLG1 System TIR 71.7±11.3%, TBR 1.4±3.7%, CV 32.4±7.1%). Tight TIR% (70–140 mg/dl) was significantly higher (p<0.01) in the Tandem t:slim X2 with Control-IQ group (51.5±9.8%) when compared to Minimed 780G group (42.1±13.7%) and DBLG1 System (40.1±10.5%). In all three groups the insulin infusion similarly decreased from midnight to 05.00 am and then increased.
Conclusions All the three AHCL systems achieved the recommended TIR, TBR and CV without difference in insulin requirement. The Tandem Control-IQ system obtained a higher tight TIR.
Oliver Kuss1,2,3 · Michael Roden3,4,5 · Sabrina Schlesinger1,3 · Annika Hoyer6
Received: 27 May 2024 / Accepted: 23 November 2024 / Published online: 12 December 2024 © The Author(s) 2024
Aims Two prerequisites must be met for the precision treatment approach to be beneficial for treated individuals. First, there must be treatment heterogeneity; second, in case of treatment heterogeneity, clinical predictors to identify people who would benefit from one treatment more than from others must be available. There is an established meta-regression approach to assess these two prerequisites that relies on measuring the variability of a clinical outcome after treatment in placebo-controlled randomised trials. We recently applied this approach to the treatment of type 2 diabetes for the clinical outcomes of glycaemic control and body weight and repeat it for the clinical outcome of all-cause mortality.
Methods We performed a meta-regression analysis using digitalized individual participant information on time to death from 10 large cardiovascular outcome trials (7563 deaths from 99,746 participants) on DPP-4 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, and SGLT-2 inhibitors with respect to the variability of all-cause mortality and its potential predictors after treatment.
Results The adjusted difference in log(SD) values of time to death between the verum and placebo arms was −0.036 (95%- CI: −0.059; −0.013), showing larger variability of time to death in the placebo arms. No clinical predictors were found to explain treatment heterogeneity.
Conclusions This analysis suggests that the potential of the precision treatment approach in type 2 diabetes is low, at least with regard to improvement of all-cause mortality in population with high cardiovascular risk. This extends our previous findings for the clinical outcomes of glycaemic control and body weight.
Keywords Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors · Glucagon-like peptide 1 · HbA1c · Meta-regression · Precision medicine · Sodium–glucose transporter 2 inhibitors · Type 2 diabetes mellitus
原创: 十六点五 中山二院糖尿病足中心
人们对于糖尿病外周血管病变越来越关注,一方面,它是糖尿病足形成的最重要的原因;另一方面,它也是糖尿病进展到一定程度的标志,严重的糖尿病外周血管病变,往往标志着糖尿病进展到晚期,心、肾、脑、眼底等重要脏器的血管也存在严重的问题,而糖尿病足长期的皮肤溃疡不愈合,其产生的大量炎症因子,也会加重这些血管病变,因此,如何评价(诊断)及治疗糖尿病外周血管病变,成为了糖尿病诊断和治疗的最重要的领域。
糖尿病足的预防是各种指南中最重要的部分,无论是国内还是国外的,在各版的IWGDF指南都是重要内容,而且说明得特别详细及有比较多得循证医学的证据支持。但比较几个版本的IWGDF指南及国内外其他指南,这部分是肯定存在的,从中可以看出“糖尿病足的预防”已经深入人心。
糖尿病足实质上就是一种糖尿病人足部出现难以愈合的皮肤慢性溃疡,如何使糖尿病人足部皮肤慢性溃疡愈合是糖尿病足治疗的中心,因此,围绕足部皮肤慢性溃疡愈合是糖尿病足治疗的中心环节。
IWGDF(The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot)是一个以欧美从事糖尿病足工作的专家为主的,有其他大洲有关专家共同组成的,目前国际上有关糖尿病足的预防、诊断、治疗、研究、管理等方面最专业的国际组织之一(基本上没有之一)。
伤口世界平台生态圈,以“关爱人间所有伤口患者”为愿景,连接、整合和拓展线上和线下的管理慢性伤口的资源,倡导远程、就近和居家管理慢性伤口,解决伤口专家的碎片化时间的价值创造、诊疗经验的裂变复制、和患者的就近、居家和低成本管理慢性伤口的问题。
2019广东省医疗行业协会伤口管理分会年会
扫一扫了解详情:
任何关于疾病的建议都不能替代执业医师的面对面诊断。所有门诊时间仅供参考,最终以医院当日公布为准。
网友、医生言论仅代表其个人观点,不代表本站同意其说法,请谨慎参阅,本站不承担由此引起的法律责任。