The Department of Internal Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Medical College, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266100, China.
Int J Endocrinol. 2013;2013:614242. doi: 10.1155/2013/614242. Epub 2013 May 8.
Aims. To examine the potential differences between multiple daily injection (MDI) regimens based on new long-acting insulin analogues (glargine or detemir) plus prandial insulin aspart and continuous subcutaneous insulin aspart infusion (CSII) in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. Methods. Patients (n = 119) with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes of a duration exceeding five years were randomly assigned into three groups: Group A treated with CSII using insulin aspart; Group B treated with glargine-based MDI and Group C treated with detemir-based MDI. Results. Good glycemic control was achieved by patients in Group A in a significantly shorter duration than patients in Groups B and C. Total daily insulin, basal insulin dose and dose per kg body weight in Group A were significantly less than those in Groups B and C. Daily blood glucose fluctuation in Group A was significantly less than that in Groups B and C. There were no differences between Groups B and C. Conclusions. Aspart-based CSII may achieve good blood glucose control with less insulin doses over a shorter period compared with glargine or detemir-based MDI. No differences between glargine- and detemir-based MDI were detected in poorly controlled subjects with type 2 diabetes.
目的。研究基于新型长效胰岛素类似物(甘精胰岛素或地特胰岛素)联合餐时胰岛素门冬氨酸和持续皮下胰岛素输注(CSII)的多次每日注射(MDI)方案与 CSII 在血糖控制不佳的 2 型糖尿病患者中的潜在差异。方法。将病程超过 5 年且血糖控制不佳的 119 例 2 型糖尿病患者随机分为 3 组:A 组接受门冬胰岛素 CSII 治疗;B 组接受甘精胰岛素 MDI 治疗;C 组接受地特胰岛素 MDI 治疗。结果。A 组患者在明显更短的时间内实现了良好的血糖控制,而 B 组和 C 组患者则需要更长的时间。A 组患者的总日胰岛素、基础胰岛素剂量和单位体重剂量均明显低于 B 组和 C 组。A 组患者的每日血糖波动明显小于 B 组和 C 组。B 组和 C 组之间没有差异。结论。与甘精胰岛素或地特胰岛素 MDI 相比,基于门冬氨酸的 CSII 可能在更短的时间内用更少的胰岛素剂量实现良好的血糖控制。在血糖控制不佳的 2 型糖尿病患者中,甘精胰岛素和地特胰岛素 MDI 之间未发现差异。