Kovatchev Boris P, Renard Eric, Cobelli Claudio, Zisser Howard C, Keith-Hynes Patrick, Anderson Stacey M, Brown Sue A, Chernavvsky Daniel R, Breton Marc D, Mize Lloyd B, Farret Anne, Place Jérôme, Bruttomesso Daniela, Del Favero Simone, Boscari Federico, Galasso Silvia, Avogaro Angelo, Magni Lalo, Di Palma Federico, Toffanin Chiara, Messori Mirko, Dassau Eyal, Doyle Francis J
Center for Diabetes Technology and Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
Department of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Nutrition, Montpellier University Hospital, INSERM Clinical Investigation Center 1001, Institute of Functional Genomics, CNRS UMR 5203, INSERM U661, University of Montpellier 1, Montpellier, France.
Diabetes Care. 2014 Jul;37(7):1789-96. doi: 10.2337/dc13-2076. Epub 2014 Jun 14.
We estimate the effect size of hypoglycemia risk reduction on closed-loop control (CLC) versus open-loop (OL) sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy in supervised outpatient setting.
Twenty patients with type 1 diabetes initiated the study at the Universities of Virginia, Padova, and Montpellier and Sansum Diabetes Research Institute; 18 completed the entire protocol. Each patient participated in two 40-h outpatient sessions, CLC versus OL, in randomized order. Sensor (Dexcom G4) and insulin pump (Tandem t:slim) were connected to Diabetes Assistant (DiAs)-a smartphone artificial pancreas platform. The patient operated the system through the DiAs user interface during both CLC and OL; study personnel supervised on site and monitored DiAs remotely. There were no dietary restrictions; 45-min walks in town and restaurant dinners were included in both CLC and OL; alcohol was permitted.
The primary outcome-reduction in risk for hypoglycemia as measured by the low blood glucose (BG) index (LGBI)-resulted in an effect size of 0.64, P = 0.003, with a twofold reduction of hypoglycemia requiring carbohydrate treatment: 1.2 vs. 2.4 episodes/session on CLC versus OL (P = 0.02). This was accompanied by a slight decrease in percentage of time in the target range of 3.9-10 mmol/L (66.1 vs. 70.7%) and increase in mean BG (8.9 vs. 8.4 mmol/L; P = 0.04) on CLC versus OL.
CLC running on a smartphone (DiAs) in outpatient conditions reduced hypoglycemia and hypoglycemia treatments when compared with sensor-augmented pump therapy. This was accompanied by marginal increase in average glycemia resulting from a possible overemphasis on hypoglycemia safety.
我们评估在门诊监护环境下,闭环控制(CLC)与开环(OL)传感器增强型胰岛素泵治疗相比,降低低血糖风险的效应大小。
20例1型糖尿病患者在弗吉尼亚大学、帕多瓦大学、蒙彼利埃大学和桑萨姆糖尿病研究所开始本研究;18例完成了整个方案。每位患者按随机顺序参加两个40小时的门诊疗程,分别为CLC和OL。传感器(德康G4)和胰岛素泵(串联t:slim)连接到糖尿病助手(DiAs)——一个智能手机人工胰腺平台。在CLC和OL期间,患者均通过DiAs用户界面操作系统;研究人员在现场进行监督,并远程监测DiAs。没有饮食限制;CLC和OL期间均包括在城镇45分钟的散步和餐厅晚餐;允许饮酒。
主要结局——通过低血糖(BG)指数(LGBI)测量的低血糖风险降低——效应大小为0.64,P = 0.003,需要碳水化合物治疗的低血糖发生率降低了两倍:CLC组与OL组分别为1.2次/疗程对2.4次/疗程(P = 0.02)。这伴随着3.9 - 10 mmol/L目标范围内时间百分比略有下降(66.1%对70.7%)以及CLC组与OL组相比平均BG升高(8.9 mmol/L对8.4 mmol/L;P = 0.04)。
与传感器增强型泵治疗相比,门诊条件下在智能手机(DiAs)上运行的CLC降低了低血糖及低血糖治疗的发生率。这伴随着平均血糖水平略有升高,可能是由于过度强调低血糖安全性所致。