Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Department of Endocrinology and Diabetes, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2021 Jun;23(6):460-466. doi: 10.1089/dia.2020.0589. Epub 2021 Jan 27.
This prerandomization analysis from the Australian HCL-Adult trial (registration number: ACTRN12617000520336) compared masked continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics among adults using insulin pumps versus multiple daily injections (MDIs), who were all self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG). Adults with type 1 diabetes, using an insulin pump or MDIs without real-time CGM (and entering a trial of closed-loop technology), were eligible. MDI users were given an insulin dosage calculator. All participants received diabetes and carbohydrate-counting education, then wore masked CGM sensors for 3 weeks. Ethics Approval: HREC-D 088/16 Adults using MDIs ( = 61) versus pump ( = 59) did not differ by age, sex, diabetes duration, insulin total daily dose, or HbA at baseline. After education, median (interquartile range) CGM time in range (TIR) 70-180 mg/dL (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) was 54% (47, 62) for those using MDIs and 56% (48, 66) for those using pump ( = 0.40). All CGM metrics were equivalent for 24 h/day for MDI and pump users. Overnight, those using MDIs (vs. pump) spent more time with glucose <54 mg/dL (<3.0 mmol/L): 1.4% (0.1, 5.1) versus 0.5% (0.0, 2.0), respectively ( = 0.012). They also had more CGM hypoglycemia episodes (121 vs. 54, respectively; incidence rate ratio [95% confidence interval] 2.48 [1.51, 4.06]; < 0.001). Adults with type 1 diabetes using pumps versus MDIs in conjunction with SMBG experienced less nocturnal hypoglycemia, measured by masked CGM, after equivalent diabetes and dietary education in conjunction with insulin dosage calculator provision to all. However, both groups had equivalent TIR. This observation may reflect advantages afforded by flexibility in basal insulin delivery provided by pumps.
这项来自澳大利亚 HCL-Adult 试验的预随机分析(注册号:ACTRN12617000520336)比较了使用胰岛素泵与多次皮下注射(MDI)的成年人的连续血糖监测(CGM)指标,这些成年人都在进行自我血糖监测(SMBG)。符合条件的参与者为使用胰岛素泵或无实时 CGM 的 MDI(并参加闭环技术试验)的 1 型糖尿病成年人。MDI 用户被给予胰岛素剂量计算器。所有参与者都接受了糖尿病和碳水化合物计数教育,然后佩戴了 3 周的掩蔽 CGM 传感器。伦理批准:HREC-D 088/16 使用 MDI 的成年人( = 61)与使用泵的成年人( = 59)在年龄、性别、糖尿病持续时间、胰岛素总日剂量或基线时的 HbA 方面没有差异。在接受教育后,使用 MDI 的成年人(中位数(四分位距)CGM 时间在目标范围内(TIR)70-180mg/dL(3.9-10.0mmol/L)为 54%(47,62),使用泵的成年人则为 56%(48,66)( = 0.40)。对于 MDI 和泵使用者,所有 CGM 指标在 24 小时/天内均等效。在夜间,使用 MDI 的成年人(与泵相比)有更多的血糖<54mg/dL(<3.0mmol/L)时间:分别为 1.4%(0.1,5.1)和 0.5%(0.0,2.0)( = 0.012)。他们还发生了更多的 CGM 低血糖事件(分别为 121 次和 54 次;发生率比[95%置信区间]2.48[1.51,4.06]; < 0.001)。在接受糖尿病和饮食教育并提供胰岛素剂量计算器后,与使用 MDI 联合 SMBG 的 1 型糖尿病成年人相比,使用胰岛素泵的成年人经历了较少的夜间低血糖,这是通过掩蔽 CGM 测量的。然而,两组的 TIR 相当。这一观察结果可能反映了泵提供的基础胰岛素输送灵活性带来的优势。