Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2009;9(20):1-58. Epub 2009 Oct 1.
In June 2008, the Medical Advisory Secretariat began work on the Diabetes Strategy Evidence Project, an evidence-based review of the literature surrounding strategies for successful management and treatment of diabetes. This project came about when the Health System Strategy Division at the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care subsequently asked the secretariat to provide an evidentiary platform for the Ministry's newly released Diabetes Strategy.After an initial review of the strategy and consultation with experts, the secretariat identified five key areas in which evidence was needed. Evidence-based analyses have been prepared for each of these five areas: insulin pumps, behavioural interventions, bariatric surgery, home telemonitoring, and community based care. For each area, an economic analysis was completed where appropriate and is described in a separate report.To review these titles within the Diabetes Strategy Evidence series, please visit the Medical Advisory Secretariat Web site, http://www.health.gov.on.ca/english/providers/program/mas/mas_about.html,DIABETES STRATEGY EVIDENCE PLATFORM: Summary of Evidence-Based AnalysesContinuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Pumps for Type 1 and Type 2 Adult Diabetics: An Evidence-Based AnalysisBehavioural Interventions for Type 2 Diabetes: An Evidence-Based AnalysisBARIATRIC SURGERY FOR PEOPLE WITH DIABETES AND MORBID OBESITY: An Evidence-Based SummaryCommunity-Based Care for the Management of Type 2 Diabetes: An Evidence-Based AnalysisHome Telemonitoring for Type 2 Diabetes: An Evidence-Based AnalysisApplication of the Ontario Diabetes Economic Model (ODEM) to Determine the Cost-effectiveness and Budget Impact of Selected Type 2 Diabetes Interventions in Ontario
The objective of this analysis is to review the efficacy of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) pumps as compared to multiple daily injections (MDI) for the type 1 and type 2 adult diabetics.
Insulin therapy is an integral component of the treatment of many individuals with diabetes. Type 1, or juvenile-onset diabetes, is a life-long disorder that commonly manifests in children and adolescents, but onset can occur at any age. It represents about 10% of the total diabetes population and involves immune-mediated destruction of insulin producing cells in the pancreas. The loss of these cells results in a decrease in insulin production, which in turn necessitates exogenous insulin therapy. Type 2, or 'maturity-onset' diabetes represents about 90% of the total diabetes population and is marked by a resistance to insulin or insufficient insulin secretion. The risk of developing type 2 diabetes increases with age, obesity, and lack of physical activity. The condition tends to develop gradually and may remain undiagnosed for many years. Approximately 30% of patients with type 2 diabetes eventually require insulin therapy. CSII PUMPS: In conventional therapy programs for diabetes, insulin is injected once or twice a day in some combination of short- and long-acting insulin preparations. Some patients require intensive therapy regimes known as multiple daily injection (MDI) programs, in which insulin is injected three or more times a day. It's a time consuming process and usually requires an injection of slow acting basal insulin in the morning or evening and frequent doses of short-acting insulin prior to eating. The most common form of slower acting insulin used is neutral protamine gagedorn (NPH), which reaches peak activity 3 to 5 hours after injection. There are some concerns surrounding the use of NPH at night-time as, if injected immediately before bed, nocturnal hypoglycemia may occur. To combat nocturnal hypoglycemia and other issues related to absorption, alternative insulins have been developed, such as the slow-acting insulin glargine. Glargine has no peak action time and instead acts consistently over a twenty-four hour period, helping reduce the frequency of hypoglycemic episodes. Alternatively, intensive therapy regimes can be administered by continuous insulin infusion (CSII) pumps. These devices attempt to closely mimic the behaviour of the pancreas, continuously providing a basal level insulin to the body with additional boluses at meal times. Modern CSII pumps are comprised of a small battery-driven pump that is designed to administer insulin subcutaneously through the abdominal wall via butterfly needle. The insulin dose is adjusted in response to measured capillary glucose values in a fashion similar to MDI and is thus often seen as a preferred method to multiple injection therapy. There are, however, still risks associated with the use of CSII pumps. Despite the increased use of CSII pumps, there is uncertainty around their effectiveness as compared to MDI for improving glycemic control. PART A: TYPE 1 DIABETIC ADULTS (#ENTITYSTARTX02265;19 YEARS) An evidence-based analysis on the efficacy of CSII pumps compared to MDI was carried out on both type 1 and type 2 adult diabetic populations.
Are CSII pumps more effective than MDI for improving glycemic control in adults (≥19 years) with type 1 diabetes?Are CSII pumps more effective than MDI for improving additional outcomes related to diabetes such as quality of life (QoL)?
Randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analysis and/or health technology assessments from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHLAdults (≥ 19 years)Type 1 diabetesStudy evaluates CSII vs. MDIPublished between January 1, 2002 - March 24, 2009Patient currently on intensive insulin therapy
Studies with <20 patientsStudies <5 weeks in durationCSII applied only at night time and not 24 hours/dayMixed group of diabetes patients (children, adults, type 1, type 2)Pregnancy studies
The primary outcomes of interest were glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, mean daily blood glucose, glucose variability, and frequency of hypoglycaemic events. Other outcomes of interest were insulin requirements, adverse events, and quality of life.
The literature search strategy employed keywords and subject headings to capture the concepts of: 1) insulin pumps, and 2) type 1 diabetes. The search was run on July 6, 2008 in the following databases: Ovid MEDLINE (1996 to June Week 4 2008), OVID MEDLINE In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE (1980 to 2008 Week 26), OVID CINAHL (1982 to June Week 4 2008) the Cochrane Library, and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination/International Agency for Health Technology Assessment. A search update was run on March 24, 2009 and studies published prior to 2002 were also examined for inclusion into the review. Parallel search strategies were developed for the remaining databases. Search results were limited to human and English-language published between January 2002 and March 24, 2009. Abstracts were reviewed, and studies meeting the inclusion criteria outlined above were obtained. Reference lists were also checked for relevant studies.
The database search identified 519 relevant citations published between 1996 and March 24, 2009. Of the 519 abstracts reviewed, four RCTs and one abstract met the inclusion criteria outlined above. While efficacy outcomes were reported in each of the trials, a meta-analysis was not possible due to missing data around standard deviations of change values as well as missing data for the first period of the crossover arm of the trial. Meta-analysis was not possible on other outcomes (quality of life, insulin requirements, frequency of hypoglycemia) due to differences in reporting. HBA1C: In studies where no baseline data was reported, the final values were used. Two studies (Hanaire-Broutin et al. 2000, Hoogma et al. 2005) reported a slight reduction in HbA1c of 0.35% and 0.22% respectively for CSII pumps in comparison to MDI. A slightly larger reduction in HbA1c of 0.84% was reported by DeVries et al.; however, this study was the only study to include patients with poor glycemic control marked by higher baseline HbA1c levels. One study (Bruttomesso et al. 2008) showed no difference between CSII pumps and MDI on Hba1c levels and was the only study using insulin glargine (consistent with results of parallel RCT in abstract by Bolli 2004). While there is statistically significant reduction in HbA1c in three of four trials, there is no evidence to suggest these results are clinically significant. MEAN BLOOD GLUCOSE: Three of four studies reported a statistically significant reduction in the mean daily blood glucose for patients using CSII pump, though these results were not clinically significant. One study (DeVries et al. 2002) did not report study data on mean blood glucose but noted that the differences were not statistically significant. There is difficulty with interpreting study findings as blood glucose was measured differently across studies. Three of four studies used a glucose diary, while one study used a memory meter. In addition, frequency of self monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) varied from four to nine times per day. Measurements used to determine differences in mean daily blood glucose between the CSII pump group and MDI group at clinic visits were collected at varying time points. Two studies use measurements from the last day prior to the final visit (Hoogma et al. 2005, DeVries et al. 2002), while one study used measurements taken during the last 30 days and another study used measurements taken during the 14 days prior to the final visit of each treatment period. GLUCOSE VARIABILITY: All four studies showed a statistically significant reduction in glucose variability for patients using CSII pumps compared to those using MDI, though one, Bruttomesso et al. 2008, only showed a significant reduction at the morning time point. Brutomesso et al. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)
2008年6月,医学咨询秘书处开始开展糖尿病策略证据项目,这是一项围绕糖尿病成功管理和治疗策略的文献循证综述。该项目源于卫生与长期护理部的卫生系统策略司随后要求秘书处为该部新发布的糖尿病策略提供一个证据平台。在对该策略进行初步审查并与专家协商后,秘书处确定了五个需要证据的关键领域。已针对这五个领域中的每一个领域进行了循证分析:胰岛素泵、行为干预、减肥手术、家庭远程监测和社区护理。对于每个领域,在适当的情况下完成了经济分析,并在一份单独的报告中进行了描述。若要查阅糖尿病策略证据系列中的这些文献,请访问医学咨询秘书处网站:http://www.health.gov.on.ca/english/providers/program/mas/mas_about.html,糖尿病策略证据平台:循证分析总结,1型和2型成年糖尿病患者的持续皮下胰岛素输注泵:循证分析;2型糖尿病的行为干预:循证分析;糖尿病合并病态肥胖患者的减肥手术:循证总结;2型糖尿病管理的社区护理:循证分析;2型糖尿病的家庭远程监测:循证分析;安大略省糖尿病经济模型(ODEM)在确定安大略省选定的2型糖尿病干预措施的成本效益和预算影响方面的应用
本分析的目的是比较持续皮下胰岛素输注(CSII)泵与多次皮下注射(MDI)对1型和2型成年糖尿病患者的疗效。
胰岛素治疗是许多糖尿病患者治疗的一个组成部分。1型糖尿病,即青少年发病型糖尿病,是一种终身疾病,通常在儿童和青少年中表现出来,但任何年龄都可能发病。它约占糖尿病总人口的10%,涉及胰腺中产生胰岛素细胞的免疫介导破坏。这些细胞的丧失导致胰岛素分泌减少,进而需要外源性胰岛素治疗。2型糖尿病,即“成年发病型”糖尿病,约占糖尿病总人口的90%,其特征是对胰岛素抵抗或胰岛素分泌不足。患2型糖尿病的风险随着年龄、肥胖和缺乏体育活动而增加。这种疾病往往逐渐发展,可能多年未被诊断出来。大约30%的2型糖尿病患者最终需要胰岛素治疗。CSII泵:在糖尿病常规治疗方案中,胰岛素以短效和长效胰岛素制剂的某种组合每天注射一次或两次。一些患者需要强化治疗方案,即多次皮下注射(MDI)方案,其中胰岛素每天注射三次或更多次。这是一个耗时的过程,通常需要在早上或晚上注射长效基础胰岛素,并在进食前频繁注射短效胰岛素。最常用的长效胰岛素形式是中性鱼精蛋白锌胰岛素(NPH),注射后3至5小时达到峰值活性。夜间使用NPH存在一些问题,因为如果在睡前立即注射,可能会发生夜间低血糖症。为了对抗夜间低血糖症和其他与吸收相关的问题,已经开发了替代胰岛素,如长效胰岛素甘精胰岛素。甘精胰岛素没有峰值作用时间,而是在24小时内持续发挥作用,有助于减少低血糖发作的频率。或者,强化治疗方案可以通过持续胰岛素输注(CSII)泵进行。这些设备试图紧密模拟胰腺的行为,持续向身体提供基础水平的胰岛素,并在进餐时额外注射大剂量胰岛素。现代CSII泵由一个小型电池驱动泵组成,该泵设计通过蝶形针经腹壁皮下注射胰岛素。胰岛素剂量根据测量的毛细血管葡萄糖值进行调整,方式类似于MDI,因此通常被视为多次注射治疗的首选方法。然而,使用CSII泵仍然存在风险。尽管CSII泵的使用越来越多,但与MDI相比,其在改善血糖控制方面的有效性仍存在不确定性。A部分:1型成年糖尿病患者(≥19岁)对1型和2型成年糖尿病患者群体进行了CSII泵与MDI疗效的循证分析。
CSII泵在改善1型糖尿病成年患者(≥19岁)的血糖控制方面是否比MDI更有效?CSII泵在改善与糖尿病相关的其他结局(如生活质量(QoL))方面是否比MDI更有效?
来自MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL的随机对照试验、系统评价、荟萃分析和/或卫生技术评估;成年患者(≥19岁);1型糖尿病;研究评估CSII与MDI;2002年1月1日至2009年3月24日发表;目前正在接受强化胰岛素治疗的患者
患者少于20例的研究;持续时间少于5周的研究;仅在夜间应用CSII且非24小时/天应用的研究;糖尿病患者混合组(儿童、成人、1型、2型);妊娠研究
感兴趣的主要结局是糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)水平、平均每日血糖、血糖变异性和低血糖事件的频率。其他感兴趣的结局是胰岛素需求、不良事件和生活质量。
文献检索策略使用关键词和主题词来捕捉以下概念:1)胰岛素泵,以及2)1型糖尿病。2008年7月6日在以下数据库中进行了检索:Ovid MEDLINE(1996年至2008年第4周)、OVID MEDLINE在研及其他未索引引文、EMBASE(1980年至2008年第26周)、OVID CINAHL(1982年至2008年第4周)、Cochrane图书馆以及综述与传播中心/国际卫生技术评估机构。2009年3月24日进行了检索更新,还检查了2002年之前发表的研究以纳入综述。为其余数据库制定了平行检索策略。检索结果限于2002年1月至2009年3月24日发表的英文人类文献。对摘要进行了审查,并获取了符合上述纳入标准的研究。还检查了参考文献列表以查找相关研究。
数据库检索确定了1996年至2009年3月24日期间发表的519条相关引文。在审查的519篇摘要中,四项随机对照试验和一篇摘要符合上述纳入标准。虽然每项试验都报告了疗效结局,但由于变化值标准差周围的数据缺失以及试验交叉组第一阶段的数据缺失,无法进行荟萃分析。由于报告差异,无法对其他结局(生活质量、胰岛素需求、低血糖频率)进行荟萃分析。HbA1c:在未报告基线数据的研究中,使用最终值。两项研究(Hanaire - Broutin等人,2000年;Hoogma等人,2005年)报告,与MDI相比,CSII泵的HbA1c分别略有降低0.35%和0.22%。DeVries等人报告HbA1c略有更大幅度的降低0.84%;然而,该研究是唯一一项纳入基线HbA1c水平较高、血糖控制不佳患者的研究。一项研究(Bruttomesso等人,2008年)显示CSII泵和MDI在HbA1c水平上没有差异,并且是唯一一项使用甘精胰岛素(与Bolli 2004年摘要中的平行随机对照试验结果一致)的研究。虽然四项试验中有三项HbA1c有统计学显著降低,但没有证据表明这些结果具有临床意义。平均血糖:四项研究中有三项报告使用CSII泵的患者平均每日血糖有统计学显著降低,尽管这些结果没有临床意义。一项研究(DeVries等人,2002年)未报告平均血糖的研究数据,但指出差异无统计学意义。由于各研究中血糖测量方法不同,难以解释研究结果。四项研究中有三项使用血糖日记,而一项研究使用记忆仪。此外,自我血糖监测(SMBG)的频率从每天四次到九次不等。用于确定CSII泵组和MDI组在门诊就诊时平均每日血糖差异的测量值是在不同时间点收集的。两项研究使用最后一次就诊前一天的测量值(Hoogma等人,2005年;DeVries等人,2002年),而一项研究使用最后30天内的测量值,另一项研究使用每个治疗期最后一次就诊前14天内的测量值。血糖变异性:所有四项研究均显示,与使用MDI的患者相比,使用CSII泵的患者血糖变异性有统计学显著降低,尽管Bruttomesso等人(2008年)的一项研究仅在早晨时间点显示有显著降低。Brutomesso等人(摘要截断)