Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Clinical Pharmacology, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Drugs. 2010 Dec 3;70(17):2229-45. doi: 10.2165/11585220-000000000-00000.
In type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus patients, hyperglycaemia is independently related to the development of microvascular and macrovascular complications. Glycaemic targets and the benefits of intensive versus conventional glucose control are under debate. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses comparing the effects of intensive versus conventional glucose control on microvascular and macrovascular complications in type 1 and 2 diabetes. MEDLINE and Cochrane database searches were performed with a limit on randomized controlled trials or meta-analysis and keywords related to glucose control and diabetes. In addition, related articles and reference lists of relevant articles and guidelines were reviewed. Nine randomized controlled trials, three in type 1 and six in type 2 diabetes, and four meta-analyses in type 2 diabetes were reviewed. These studies included more than 30,000 patients. On the basis of these trials and meta-analyses, it can be concluded that intensive glucose control has a beneficial effect on microvascular complications (retinopathy, nephropathy, neuropathy) in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients. The risk reduction of developing a microvascular complication varied between 25% and 76%. Particularly in patients with type 2 diabetes, there was a 10-15% decrease in nonfatal myocardial infarction with intensive glucose control, but no effect on stroke, cardiovascular death or all-cause mortality was observed. There was a beneficial effect of intensive glucose control on cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes in only one trial. In all studies, intensive glucose control was associated with at least twice the risk for serious hypoglycaemia than the conventional-control group. In conclusion, compared with conventional glucose control, intensive glucose control is associated with fewer microvascular complications in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, a decrease in coronary events, especially in type 2 diabetes, and more serious hypoglycaemia.
在 1 型和 2 型糖尿病患者中,高血糖与微血管和大血管并发症的发生独立相关。血糖控制目标和强化与常规血糖控制的益处存在争议。本综述的目的是提供 1 型和 2 型糖尿病中强化与常规血糖控制对微血管和大血管并发症影响的随机对照试验和荟萃分析的概述。使用限制在随机对照试验或荟萃分析和与血糖控制和糖尿病相关的关键字对 MEDLINE 和 Cochrane 数据库进行了搜索。此外,还回顾了相关文章和指南的参考文献列表。综述了 9 项随机对照试验,其中 3 项为 1 型糖尿病,6 项为 2 型糖尿病,4 项为 2 型糖尿病的荟萃分析。这些研究包括超过 30,000 名患者。基于这些试验和荟萃分析,可以得出结论,强化血糖控制对 1 型和 2 型糖尿病患者的微血管并发症(视网膜病变、肾病、神经病变)有有益的影响。发生微血管并发症的风险降低了 25%至 76%。特别是在 2 型糖尿病患者中,强化血糖控制可使非致命性心肌梗死的风险降低 10-15%,但未观察到对中风、心血管死亡或全因死亡率的影响。只有一项试验表明强化血糖控制对 1 型糖尿病患者的心血管疾病有有益影响。在所有研究中,与常规血糖控制组相比,强化血糖控制组严重低血糖的风险至少增加了两倍。总之,与常规血糖控制相比,强化血糖控制与 1 型和 2 型糖尿病患者的微血管并发症减少、冠心病事件减少(尤其是 2 型糖尿病患者)以及更严重的低血糖有关。