There is no argument that improving mean levels of glycemic control as judged by assays for glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) reduces the risks of microvascular complications and cardiovascular disease ...events in patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. However, observations in some trials have suggested that targeting HbA(1c) to suggested targets may not always result in improved outcomes for people with long-standing type 2 diabetes. The reasons why the glycemic control strategies that primarily use HbA(1c) in these studies did not have predicted outcomes are not clear. Thus, controversy remains as to whether there are glycemic metrics beyond HbA(1c) that can be defined as effective measures that can be used in addition to HbA(1c) to help in assessing the risk of an individual developing diabetes complications. In this regard, the concept of "glycemic variability" (GV) is one metric that has attracted a lot of attention. GV can be simply defined as the degree to which a patient's blood glucose level fluctuates between high (peaks) and low (nadir) levels. The best and most precise way to assess GV is also one that is still debated. Thus, while there is universal agreement that HbA(1c) is the current gold standard for the primary clinical target, there is no consensus as to whether other proposed glycemic metrics hold promise to provide additional clinical data or whether there should be additional targets beyond HbA(1c). Therefore, given the current controversy, we provide a Point-Counterpoint debate on this issue. In the point narrative below, Dr. Hirsch provides his argument that fluctuations in blood glucose as assessed by GV metrics are deleterious and control of GV should be a primary treatment target. In the following counterpoint narrative, Dr. Bergenstal argues that there are better markers to assess the risk of diabetes than GV and provides his consideration of other concepts.
Improvements in sensor accuracy, greater convenience and ease of use, and expanding reimbursement have led to growing adoption of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). However, successful utilization ...of CGM technology in routine clinical practice remains relatively low. This may be due in part to the lack of clear and agreed-upon glycemic targets that both diabetes teams and people with diabetes can work toward. Although unified recommendations for use of key CGM metrics have been established in three separate peer-reviewed articles, formal adoption by diabetes professional organizations and guidance in the practical application of these metrics in clinical practice have been lacking. In February 2019, the Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes (ATTD) Congress convened an international panel of physicians, researchers, and individuals with diabetes who are expert in CGM technologies to address this issue. This article summarizes the ATTD consensus recommendations for relevant aspects of CGM data utilization and reporting among the various diabetes populations.
Two types of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems are now available: real-time CGM (rtCGM) and intermittently scanned (isCGM). Current rtCGM systems automatically transmit a continuous stream ...of glucose data to the user, provide alerts and active alarms, and transmit glucose data (trend and numerical) in real time to a receiver, smart watch, or smartphone. The current isCGM system provides the same type of glucose data but requires the user to purposely scan the sensor to obtain information, and it does not have alerts and alarms. Both CGM technologies have significant advantages over self-monitoring of blood glucose; however, differences in the features and capabilities of the two approaches must be considered when guiding patient selection of the system that meets their individual needs.
Abstract
Objective
The objective is to formulate clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of diabetes in older adults.
Conclusions
Diabetes, particularly type 2, is becoming more prevalent in ...the general population, especially in individuals over the age of 65 years. The underlying pathophysiology of the disease in these patients is exacerbated by the direct effects of aging on metabolic regulation. Similarly, aging effects interact with diabetes to accelerate the progression of many common diabetes complications. Each section in this guideline covers all aspects of the etiology and available evidence, primarily from controlled trials, on therapeutic options and outcomes in this population. The goal is to give guidance to practicing health care providers that will benefit patients with diabetes (both type 1 and type 2), paying particular attention to avoiding unnecessary and/or harmful adverse effects.
Screening, treatment, and management of diabetes mellitus and complications in older patients.
The American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) convened a writing group to develop a consensus statement on the management of type 1 diabetes in ...adults. The writing group has considered the rapid development of new treatments and technologies and addressed the following topics: diagnosis, aims of management, schedule of care, diabetes self-management education and support, glucose monitoring, insulin therapy, hypoglycaemia, behavioural considerations, psychosocial care, diabetic ketoacidosis, pancreas and islet transplantation, adjunctive therapies, special populations, inpatient management and future perspectives. Although we discuss the schedule for follow-up examinations and testing, we have not included the evaluation and treatment of the chronic microvascular and macrovascular complications of diabetes as these are well-reviewed and discussed elsewhere. The writing group was aware of both national and international guidance on type 1 diabetes and did not seek to replicate this but rather aimed to highlight the major areas that healthcare professionals should consider when managing adults with type 1 diabetes. Though evidence-based where possible, the recommendations in the report represent the consensus opinion of the authors.
Graphical abstract
The incidence and prevalence of diabetes mellitus have grown significantly throughout the world, due primarily to the increase in type 2 diabetes. This overall increase in the number of people with ...diabetes has had a major impact on development of diabetic kidney disease (DKD), one of the most frequent complications of both types of diabetes. DKD is the leading cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD), accounting for approximately 50% of cases in the developed world. Although incidence rates for ESRD attributable to DKD have recently stabilized, these rates continue to rise in high-risk groups such as middle-aged African Americans, Native Americans, and Hispanics. The costs of care for people with DKD are extraordinarily high. In the Medicare population alone, DKD-related expenditures among this mostly older group were nearly $25 billion in 2011. Due to the high human and societal costs, the Consensus Conference on Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes was convened by the American Diabetes Association in collaboration with the American Society of Nephrology and the National Kidney Foundation to appraise issues regarding patient management, highlighting current practices and new directions. Major topic areas in DKD included (1) identification and monitoring, (2) cardiovascular disease and management of dyslipidemia, (3) hypertension and use of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockade and mineralocorticoid receptor blockade, (4) glycemia measurement, hypoglycemia, and drug therapies, (5) nutrition and general care in advanced-stage chronic kidney disease, (6) children and adolescents, and (7) multidisciplinary approaches and medical home models for health care delivery. This current state summary and research recommendations are designed to guide advances in care and the generation of new knowledge that will meaningfully improve life for people with DKD.
Type 2 diabetes associates with increased risk of mortality, but how kidney disease contributes to this mortality risk among individuals with type 2 diabetes is not completely understood. Here, we ...examined 10-year cumulative mortality by diabetes and kidney disease status for 15,046 participants in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III) by linking baseline data from NHANES III with the National Death Index. Kidney disease, defined as urinary albumin/creatinine ratio ≥30 mg/g and/or estimated GFR ≤60 ml/min per 1.73 m(2), was present in 9.4% and 42.3% of individuals without and with type 2 diabetes, respectively. Among people without diabetes or kidney disease (reference group), 10-year cumulative all-cause mortality was 7.7% (95% confidence interval 95% CI, 7.0%-8.3%), standardized to population age, sex, and race. Among individuals with diabetes but without kidney disease, standardized mortality was 11.5% (95% CI, 7.9%-15.2%), representing an absolute risk difference with the reference group of 3.9% (95% CI, 0.1%-7.7%), adjusted for demographics, and 3.4% (95% CI, -0.3% to 7.0%) when further adjusted for smoking, BP, and cholesterol. Among individuals with both diabetes and kidney disease, standardized mortality was 31.1% (95% CI, 24.7%-37.5%), representing an absolute risk difference with the reference group of 23.4% (95% CI, 17.0%-29.9%), adjusted for demographics, and 23.4% (95% CI, 17.2%-29.6%) when further adjusted. We observed similar patterns for cardiovascular and noncardiovascular mortality. In conclusion, those with kidney disease predominantly account for the increased mortality observed in type 2 diabetes.
New advances in type 1 diabetes Subramanian, Savitha; Khan, Farah; Hirsch, Irl B
BMJ (Online),
01/2024, Letnik:
384
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune condition resulting in insulin deficiency and eventual loss of pancreatic β cell function requiring lifelong insulin therapy. Since the discovery of insulin more than ...100 years ago, vast advances in treatments have improved care for many people with type 1 diabetes. Ongoing research on the genetics and immunology of type 1 diabetes and on interventions to modify disease course and preserve β cell function have expanded our broad understanding of this condition. Biomarkers of type 1 diabetes are detectable months to years before development of overt disease, and three stages of diabetes are now recognized. The advent of continuous glucose monitoring and the newer automated insulin delivery systems have changed the landscape of type 1 diabetes management and are associated with improved glycated hemoglobin and decreased hypoglycemia. Adjunctive therapies such as sodium glucose cotransporter-1 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists may find use in management in the future. Despite these rapid advances in the field, people living in under-resourced parts of the world struggle to obtain necessities such as insulin, syringes, and blood glucose monitoring essential for managing this condition. This review covers recent developments in diagnosis and treatment and future directions in the broad field of type 1 diabetes.
Abstract
The pandemic of COVID-19 has presented new challenges to hospital personnel providing care for infected patients with diabetes who represent more than 20% of critically ill patients in ...intensive care units. Appropriate glycemic management contributes to a reduction in adverse clinical outcomes in acute illness but also requires intensive patient interactions for bedside glucose monitoring, intravenous and subcutaneous insulin administration, as well as rapid intervention for hypoglycemia events. These tasks are required at a time when minimizing patient interactions is recommended as a way of avoiding prolonged exposure to COVID-19 by health care personnel who often practice in settings with limited supplies of personal protective equipment. The purpose of this manuscript is to provide guidance for clinicians for reconciling recommended standards of care for infected hospitalized patients with diabetes while also addressing the daily realities of an overwhelmed health care system in many areas of the country. The use of modified protocols for insulin administration, bedside glucose monitoring, and medications such as glucocorticoids and hydroxychloroquine that may affect glycemic control are discussed. Continuous glucose monitoring systems have been proposed as an option for reducing time spent with patients, but there are important issues that need to be addressed if these are used in hospitalized patients. On-site and remote glucose management teams have potential to provide guidance in areas where there are shortages of personnel who have expertise in inpatient glycemic management.
PDF
