Impact of technology on glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes: A meta-analysis of randomized trials on continuous glucose monitoring and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion.

AIM

To conduct a meta-analysis to assess the effect of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), and the combination of the two, on glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The analysis included randomized clinical trials comparing CSII with multiple daily injections (MDI) in people with type 2 diabetes, as well as studies comparing CGM or flash glucose monitoring (FGM) with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), with a duration of at least 12 weeks, identified in Medline or clinicaltrials.gov. The principal endpoint was glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at the end of the trial. Mean and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for HbA1c and Mantel-Haenzel odds ratios for severe hypoglycaemia were calculated, using random-effect models.

RESULTS

The retrieved trials showed a significant heterogeneity (I = 90%). The difference in HbA1c between CSII and MDI was not statistically significant (-0.26% [95% CI -0.74;0.22]; P = .29). The difference in endpoint HbA1c between CGM and SMBG was marginally significant (-0.24 [95% CI -0.49;0.00]; P = .05), and CGM was possibly associated with a lower hypoglycaemic risk. Only one trial explored the effect of FGM, as compared with SMBG, on HbA1c in type 2 diabetes, finding no difference across groups (at study end: 8.4% ± 0.8% vs 8.3% ± 1.1% with FGM and SMBG, respectively). Conversely, FGM was associated with an improvement in quality of life and with a lower incidence of hypoglycaemic events. The small number of retrieved trials indicates that the results should be interpreted with caution.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis showed that CSII, CGM and FGM provide only small benefits compared with MDI (on either HbA1c, hypoglycaemic risk or quality of life) in insulin-treated people with type 2 diabetes.