Suppr超能文献

与基础-餐时胰岛素方案相比,利拉利汀在接受非心脏手术的 2 型糖尿病患者中的降糖疗效和安全性:一项多中心随机临床试验。

Glycaemic efficacy and safety of linagliptin compared to a basal-bolus insulin regimen in patients with type 2 diabetes undergoing non-cardiac surgery: A multicentre randomized clinical trial.

机构信息

Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Lipids, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia.

Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Diabetes, Department of Medicine, University of Colorado-Denver, Denver, Colorado.

出版信息

Diabetes Obes Metab. 2019 Apr;21(4):837-843. doi: 10.1111/dom.13587. Epub 2018 Dec 17.

Abstract

AIMS

The use of incretin-based therapy, rather than or complementary to, insulin therapy is an active area of research in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We determined the glycaemic efficacy and safety of linagliptin compared to a basal-bolus insulin regimen in hospitalized surgical patients with T2D.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective open-label multicentre study randomized T2D patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery with admission blood glucose (BG) of 7.8 to 22.2 mmol/L who were under treatment with diet, oral agents or total insulin dose (TDD) ≤ 0.5 units/kg/day to either linagliptin (n = 128) daily or basal-bolus (n = 122) with glargine once daily and rapid-acting insulin before meals. Both groups received supplemental insulin for BG > 7.8 mmol/L. The primary endpoint was difference in mean daily BG between groups.

RESULTS

Mean daily BG was higher in the linagliptin group compared to the basal-bolus group (9.5 ± 2.6 vs 8.8 ± 2.3 mmol/L/dL, P = 0.03) with a mean daily BG difference of 0.6 mmol/L (95% confidence interval 0.04, 1.2). In patients with randomization BG < 11.1 mmol/L (63% of cohort), mean daily BG was similar in the linagliptin and basal-bolus groups (8.9 ± 2.3 vs 8.7 ± 2.3 mmol/L, P = 0.43); however, patients with BG ≥ 11.1 mmol/L who were treated with linagliptin had higher BG compared to the basal-bolus group (10.9 ± 2.6 vs 9.2 ± 2.2 mmol/L, P < 0.001). Linagliptin resulted in fewer hypoglycaemic events (1.6% vs 11%, P = 0.001; 86% relative risk reduction), with similar supplemental insulin and fewer daily insulin injections (2.0 ± 3.3 vs 3.1 ± 3.3, P < 0.001) compared to the basal-bolus group.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with T2D undergoing non-cardiac surgery who presented with mild to moderate hyperglycaemia (BG < 11.1 mmol/L), daily linagliptin is a safe and effective alternative to multi-dose insulin therapy, resulting in similar glucose control with lower hypoglycaemia.

摘要

目的

在 2 型糖尿病(T2D)住院患者中,使用基于肠促胰岛素的治疗方法,而不是或补充胰岛素治疗,是一个活跃的研究领域。我们比较了利拉利汀与基础-餐时胰岛素方案在 T2D 住院手术患者中的降糖疗效和安全性。

材料和方法

这项前瞻性、开放标签的多中心研究纳入了接受非心脏手术、入院时血糖(BG)为 7.8 至 22.2mmol/L、正在接受饮食、口服药物或总胰岛素剂量(TDD)≤0.5 单位/公斤/天治疗的 T2D 患者,将其随机分为利拉利汀组(n=128)或基础-餐时胰岛素组(n=122),分别给予每日利拉利汀或甘精胰岛素每日一次和餐前速效胰岛素。两组均给予 BG>7.8mmol/L 的补充胰岛素。主要终点为两组间平均每日 BG 差异。

结果

与基础-餐时胰岛素组相比,利拉利汀组的平均每日 BG 更高(9.5±2.6 与 8.8±2.3mmol/L/dL,P=0.03),平均每日 BG 差异为 0.6mmol/L(95%置信区间 0.04,1.2)。在随机 BG<11.1mmol/L(队列的 63%)的患者中,利拉利汀组和基础-餐时胰岛素组的平均每日 BG 相似(8.9±2.3 与 8.7±2.3mmol/L,P=0.43);然而,BG≥11.1mmol/L 的接受利拉利汀治疗的患者 BG 高于基础-餐时胰岛素组(10.9±2.6 与 9.2±2.2mmol/L,P<0.001)。与基础-餐时胰岛素组相比,利拉利汀组低血糖事件更少(1.6%与 11%,P=0.001;相对风险降低 86%),补充胰岛素和每日胰岛素注射次数更少(2.0±3.3 与 3.1±3.3,P<0.001)。

结论

对于接受非心脏手术、血糖轻度至中度升高(BG<11.1mmol/L)的 T2D 患者,每日利拉利汀是多剂量胰岛素治疗的安全有效替代方案,可实现相似的血糖控制,低血糖风险更低。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

3
Random Blood Glucose: Episode 1.随机血糖:第1集。
Clin Diabetes. 2025 Feb 12;43(2):317-321. doi: 10.2337/cd25-0016. eCollection 2025 Spring.

本文引用的文献

8
Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of linagliptin.利拉格列汀的临床药代动力学和药效学。
Clin Pharmacokinet. 2012 Jul 1;51(7):411-27. doi: 10.2165/11630900-000000000-00000.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验