Suppr超能文献

短期强化胰岛素治疗对血糖控制不佳的 2 型糖尿病患者中,每日多次胰岛素注射方案(甘精或地特胰岛素每日一次加餐时门冬胰岛素)与持续皮下胰岛素输注(门冬胰岛素)的比较。

Comparison of a multiple daily insulin injection regimen (glargine or detemir once daily plus prandial insulin aspart) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (aspart) in short-term intensive insulin therapy for poorly controlled type 2 diabetes patients.

机构信息

The Department of Internal Medicine, The Affiliated Hospital of Medical College, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266100, China.

出版信息

Int J Endocrinol. 2013;2013:614242. doi: 10.1155/2013/614242. Epub 2013 May 8.

Abstract

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.

摘要

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。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

2
Insulin detemir versus insulin glargine for type 2 diabetes mellitus.地特胰岛素与甘精胰岛素治疗2型糖尿病的比较。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Jul 6;2011(7):CD006383. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006383.pub2.
9
The response to short-term intensive insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes.2 型糖尿病患者短期强化胰岛素治疗的反应。
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2010 Jan;12(1):65-71. doi: 10.1111/j.1463-1326.2009.01129.x. Epub 2009 Sep 9.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验