Sansum Diabetes Research Institute, Santa Barbara, CA, USA.
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2010 Dec;12(12):955-61. doi: 10.1089/dia.2010.0064.
Insulin pump systems now provide automated bolus calculators (ABCs) that electronically calculate insulin boluses to address carbohydrate intake and out-of-range blood glucose (bG) levels. We compared the efficacy of three ABCs (Accu-Chek(®) Combo [Roche Insulin Delivery Systems (IDS), Inc., Fishers, IN, a member of the Roche Group], Animas(®) 2020 [Animas Corp., West Chester, PA, a Johnson and Johnson company], and MiniMed Paradigm Bolus Wizard(®) [Medtronic MiniMed, Northridge, CA]) to safely reduce postprandial hyperglycemia in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM).
T1DM subjects (n = 24) were recruited at a single center for a prospective, triple crossover study. ABCs with the programmed target range (80-140 mg/dL) were used in random order. Postprandial hyperglycemia was induced by reducing the calculated bolus by 25%. Two hours after test meals, the ABCs were allowed to determine whether a correction bolus was needed. Differences between 6-h bG values after test meals that achieved 2-h postprandial hyperglycemia and the mean of the target range (110 mg/dL) were determined.
The mean difference between 6-h bG levels following test meals and the 110 mg/dL bG target with the MiniMed device (47.4 ± 31.8 mg/dL) was significantly higher than the Animas (17.3 ± 30.9 mg/dL) and Roche IDS (18.8 ± 33.8 mg/dL) devices (P = 0.0022 and P = 0.0049, respectively). The number of meals with 2-h postprandial hyperglycemia and bG levels at 2 h was similar. Roche IDS and Animas devices recommended correction boluses significantly (P = 0.0001 and P = 0.0002, respectively) more frequently than the MiniMed device. ABC use was not associated with severe hypoglycemia. There was no significant difference in the rate of mild hypoglycemia (bG <60 mg/dL not requiring assistance) among the three groups (Roche IDS and Animas, n = 2; MiniMed, n = 0).
In this study, the Roche IDS and Animas devices were more efficacious in controlling postprandial hyperglycemia than the MiniMed device. This may be due, in part, to differences in ABC setup protocols and algorithms. Use of ABCs can assist in controlling postprandial glycemia without significant hypoglycemia.
胰岛素输注系统现在提供自动推注计算器(ABC),可电子计算胰岛素推注量以应对碳水化合物摄入和血糖超出范围(b)的情况。我们比较了三种 ABC(罗氏 Accu-Chek®Combo [罗氏胰岛素输送系统(IDS)公司,罗氏集团的一员,印第安纳州费希尔斯]、安imas®2020 [安imas 公司,宾夕法尼亚州西切斯特,强生的一个公司] 和美敦力 MiniMed Paradigm Bolus Wizard®[美敦力 MiniMed,加利福尼亚州北岭])在治疗 1 型糖尿病(T1DM)餐后高血糖方面的安全性和有效性。
在单中心前瞻性三交叉研究中招募了 24 名 T1DM 受试者。以随机顺序使用编程目标范围(80-140mg/dL)的 ABC。通过减少计算出的推注量 25%来诱导餐后高血糖。测试餐后两小时,允许 ABC 确定是否需要进行校正推注。比较餐后两小时达到餐后高血糖和目标范围(110mg/dL)平均值的 6 小时 bG 值之间的差异。
MiniMed 设备的 6 小时 bG 水平与 110mg/dL bG 目标值之间的平均差值(47.4±31.8mg/dL)明显高于安imas(17.3±30.9mg/dL)和罗氏 IDS(18.8±33.8mg/dL)设备(P=0.0022 和 P=0.0049)。具有 2 小时餐后高血糖和 2 小时 bG 值的膳食数量相似。罗氏 IDS 和安imas 设备比 MiniMed 设备更频繁地推荐校正推注(P=0.0001 和 P=0.0002)。ABC 使用与严重低血糖无关。三组之间(罗氏 IDS 和安imas,n=2;美敦力,n=0)轻度低血糖(不需要帮助的 bG<60mg/dL)的发生率无显著差异。
在这项研究中,罗氏 IDS 和安imas 设备在控制餐后高血糖方面比美敦力设备更有效。这可能部分归因于 ABC 设置方案和算法的差异。使用 ABC 可以帮助控制餐后血糖,而不会出现严重的低血糖。