de Visser Hannah Steiman, Waraich Seerat, Chhabra Manik, Yamamoto Jennifer, Zenlea Ian, Askin Nicole, Rabbani Rasheda, McGavock Jonathan
Diabetes Research Envisioned and Accomplished in Manitoba (DREAM) Research Theme, Children's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
Department of Pediatrics and Child Health, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences College of Medicine, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
JAMA Pediatr. 2025 Sep 8. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2025.2740.
Youth living with type 1 diabetes (T1D) are increasingly choosing automated insulin delivery (AID) systems to manage their blood glucose. Few systematic reviews meta-analyzing results from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are available to guide decision-making.
To study the association of prolonged AID system use in an outpatient setting with measures of glucose management and quality of life in youth with T1D.
MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central were searched from January 2017 to March 2025 to identify eligible RCTs.
Two reviewers independently performed literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment. Included in the analysis were RCTs of youth aged 6 to 18 years with T1D that assessed the efficacy of AID systems in outpatient settings longer than 48 hours compared with any other insulin regimen.
Two reviewers performed data extraction and quality assessment independently and reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and PRISMA literature search extension guidelines. Random-effects meta-analysis models were used to estimate the pooled measures of efficacy as a mean difference (MD) with 95% CIs for outcomes measures.
The 2 primary outcome measures were time in range (TIR) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c).
Of 2363 citations retrieved, 11 RCTs (n = 901 participants) with measures of HbA1c and 10 RCTs (n = 786 participants) with measures of TIR were included. RCTs tested interventions lasting a mean (SD) of 31 (26) weeks on youth with a median age of 12 years (range, 10.8-15.9 years); 51% were female, mean (SD) HbA1c level was 8.4% (1.1%), and mean (SD) TIR was 51% (9%). Random-effects models revealed that, compared with any insulin regimen, HbA1c level was reduced -0.41% (95% CI, -0.58% to -0.25%; I2 = 39%), whereas TIR increased 11.5% (95% CI, 9.3%-13.7%; I2 = 23%) with nighttime TIR increasing 19.7% (95% CI, 17.0%-22.4%; I2 = 36%). Random-effects models also revealed that AID use was associated with reduced time spent in hypoglycemia (<3.9 mml/L; MD = -0.32%; 95% CI, -0.60% to -0.03%; I2 = 18%) and hyperglycemia (>10 mmol/L; MD = -10.8%; 95% CI, -14.4% to -7.2%; I2 = 55%), particularly during the night (MD = -14.4%; 95% CI, -19.9% to -8.9%; I2 = 79%) compared with any insulin regimen. There were no differences in adverse events between study arms. Only 2 studies reported changes in QOL.
This systematic review and meta-analysis found that compared with any other insulin regimen, use of AID systems by youth with T1D was associated with clinically meaningful improvements in multiple measures of glucose management, including the risk of both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, without increasing the risk of adverse events. More data are needed on the efficacy of AID systems on patient report outcomes.
患有1型糖尿病(T1D)的青少年越来越多地选择自动胰岛素输送(AID)系统来管理他们的血糖。很少有对随机临床试验(RCT)结果进行系统评价和荟萃分析的研究可用于指导决策。
研究在门诊环境中长时间使用AID系统与T1D青少年的血糖管理指标和生活质量之间的关联。
检索了2017年1月至2025年3月期间的MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL和Cochrane Central,以确定符合条件的RCT。
两名 reviewers 独立进行文献筛选、数据提取和质量评估。纳入分析的是年龄在6至18岁的T1D青少年的RCT,这些研究评估了AID系统在门诊环境中超过48小时的疗效,并与任何其他胰岛素治疗方案进行了比较。
两名 reviewers 独立进行数据提取和质量评估,并按照系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)和PRISMA文献检索扩展指南进行报告。随机效应荟萃分析模型用于估计疗效的合并测量值,以平均差(MD)表示,并给出95%可信区间(CI)作为结果测量值。
2个主要结局指标是血糖达标时间(TIR)和糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)。
在检索到的2363篇文献中,纳入了11项有HbA1c测量值的RCT(n = 901名参与者)和10项有TIR测量值的RCT(n = 786名参与者)。RCT对中位年龄为12岁(范围为10.8 - 15.9岁)的青少年进行了平均(标准差)为31(26)周的干预测试;51%为女性,平均(标准差)HbA1c水平为8.4%(1.1%),平均(标准差)TIR为51%(9%)。随机效应模型显示,与任何胰岛素治疗方案相比,HbA1c水平降低了-0.41%(95%CI,-0.58%至-0.25%;I² = 39%),而TIR增加了11.5%(95%CI,9.3% - 13.7%;I² = 23%),夜间TIR增加了19.7%(95%CI,17.0% - 22.4%;I² = 36%)。随机效应模型还显示,与任何胰岛素治疗方案相比,使用AID与低血糖(<3.9 mmol/L)时间减少(MD = -0.32%;95%CI,-0.60%至-0.03%;I² = 18%)和高血糖(>10 mmol/L)时间减少(MD = -10.8%;95%CI,-14.4%至-7.2%;I² = 55%)相关,尤其是在夜间(MD = -14.4%;95%CI,-19.9%至-8.