1 Center for Diabetes Technology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.
2 Division of Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019 Jun;21(6):356-363. doi: 10.1089/dia.2019.0018. Epub 2019 May 16.
Typically, closed-loop control (CLC) studies excluded patients with significant hypoglycemia. We evaluated the effectiveness of hybrid CLC (HCLC) versus sensor-augmented pump (SAP) in reducing hypoglycemia in this high-risk population. Forty-four subjects with type 1 diabetes, 25 women, 37 ± 2 years old, HbA1c 7.4% ± 0.2% (57 ± 1.5 mmol/mol), diabetes duration 19 ± 2 years, on insulin pump, were enrolled at the University of Virginia ( = 33) and Stanford University ( = 11). Eligibility: increased risk of hypoglycemia confirmed by 1 week of blinded continuous glucose monitor (CGM); randomized to 4 weeks of home use of either HCLC or SAP. Primary/secondary outcomes: risk for hypoglycemia measured by the low blood glucose index (LBGI)/CGM-based time in ranges. Values reported: mean ± standard deviation. From baseline to the final week of study: LBGI decreased more on HCLC (2.51 ± 1.17 to 1.28 ± 0.5) than on SAP (2.1 ± 1.05 to 1.79 ± 0.98), < 0.001; percent time below 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) decreased on HCLC (7.2% ± 5.3% to 2.0% ± 1.4%) but not on SAP (5.8% ± 4.7% to 4.8% ± 4.5%), = 0.001; percent time within the target range 70-180 mg/dL (3.9-10 mmol/L) increased on HCLC (67.8% ± 13.5% to 78.2% ± 10%) but decreased on SAP (65.6% ± 12.9% to 59.6% ± 16.5%), < 0.001; percent time above 180 mg/dL (10 mmol/L) decreased on HCLC (25.1% ± 15.3% to 19.8% ± 10.1%) but increased on SAP (28.6% ± 14.6% to 35.6% ± 17.6%), = 0.009. Mean glucose did not change significantly on HCLC (144.9 ± 27.9 to 143.8 ± 14.4 mg/dL [8.1 ± 1.6 to 8.0 ± 0.8 mmol/L]) or SAP (152.5 ± 24.3 to 162.4 ± 28.2 [8.5 ± 1.4 to 9.0 ± 1.6]), = ns. Compared with SAP therapy, HCLC reduced the risk and frequency of hypoglycemia, while improving time in target range and reducing hyperglycemia in people at moderate to high risk of hypoglycemia.
通常,闭环控制 (CLC) 研究将有严重低血糖的患者排除在外。我们评估了混合闭环控制 (HCLC) 与传感器增强型泵 (SAP) 在降低高危人群低血糖方面的效果。44 名 1 型糖尿病患者,25 名女性,37±2 岁,糖化血红蛋白 7.4%±0.2%(57±1.5mmol/mol),糖尿病病程 19±2 年,使用胰岛素泵,分别在弗吉尼亚大学( = 33)和斯坦福大学( = 11)入组。入选标准:通过 1 周的盲法连续血糖监测(CGM)确认低血糖风险增加;随机分为 4 周家庭使用 HCLC 或 SAP。主要/次要结局:低血糖风险通过低血糖指数(LBGI)/基于 CGM 的时间范围来衡量。报告值:平均值 ± 标准差。从基线到研究的最后一周:HCLC 组的 LBGI 下降更多(从 2.51 ± 1.17 降至 1.28 ± 0.5),而 SAP 组(从 2.1 ± 1.05 降至 1.79 ± 0.98), < 0.001;低于 70mg/dL(3.9mmol/L)的时间百分比在 HCLC 组下降(从 7.2% ± 5.3%降至 2.0% ± 1.4%),但在 SAP 组无变化(从 5.8% ± 4.7%降至 4.8% ± 4.5%), = 0.001;70-180mg/dL(3.9-10mmol/L)的时间百分比在 HCLC 组增加(从 67.8% ± 13.5%增至 78.2% ± 10%),但在 SAP 组下降(从 65.6% ± 12.9%降至 59.6% ± 16.5%), < 0.001;高于 180mg/dL(10mmol/L)的时间百分比在 HCLC 组下降(从 25.1% ± 15.3%降至 19.8% ± 10.1%),但在 SAP 组增加(从 28.6% ± 14.6%增至 35.6% ± 17.6%), = 0.009。HCLC 组的平均血糖无明显变化(从 144.9 ± 27.9 降至 143.8 ± 14.4mg/dL [8.1 ± 1.6 至 8.0 ± 0.8mmol/L])或 SAP 组(从 152.5 ± 24.3 降至 162.4 ± 28.2 [8.5 ± 1.4 至 9.0 ± 1.6]), = ns。与 SAP 治疗相比,HCLC 降低了中高危低血糖人群的低血糖风险和频率,同时改善了目标范围内的时间并降低了高血糖。