scholarly journals SAT-127 Hypoglycemic Episodes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus : Continuous Glucose Monitoring Versus Self Monitoring of Blood Glucose

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tin Aung ◽  
Ko Ko ◽  
Tint Swe Latt ◽  
Than Than Aye ◽  
Moe Wint Aung ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huiying Wang ◽  
Yunting Zhou ◽  
Xiaofang Zhai ◽  
Bo Ding ◽  
Ting Jing ◽  
...  

AimThis study aims at evaluating glycemic control during Basalin or Lantus administration in adults with controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus using continuous glucose monitoring system (CGM).Methods47 patients with well-controlled T2DM using both Basalin and oral hypoglycemic drugs were recruited. CGM were applied from day 1 to day 3 with the unchanged dose of Basalin and then removed from day 4. A washout was performed with Lantus at the same dose as Basalin from day 4 to day 10. Then patients were continued to install the CGM under Lantus administration from day 11 to day 13. Variables of CGM, such as the area under the curve (AUC) for both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, 24h mean blood glucose (24h MBG), 24h standard deviation of blood glucose (24h SDBG), 24h mean amplitude of glycemic excursion (24h MAGE), PT (percentage of time), and time in range (TIR), were calculated and compared between Basalin group and Lantus group.ResultsThe group of Lantus showed lower 24h MBG (p<0.01), 24h MAGE (p<0.05), and lower 24h SDBG (p<0.01) than the Basalin group. Lantus−treated patients had a lower PT and AUC when the cut-off point for blood glucose was 10 mmol/L (p<0.05) and 13.9 mmol/L (p<0.05), respectively. In this study, no patient developed symptomatic hypoglycemia, few hypoglycemia was observed and there was no difference of hypoglycemia between the two groups.ConclusionIn patients with well-controlled T2DM who were treated with insulin glargine, Lantus group showed lower MBG, GV, and lower PT (BG > 10.0 mmol/L, BG > 13.9 mmol/L) than Basalin group. In summary, for T2DM population with HbA1c ≤ 7%, Lantus may be a better choice compared with Basalin.


Diabetes ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 973-P
Author(s):  
ALLISON LAROCHE ◽  
KRISTINA UTZSCHNEIDER ◽  
CATHERINE PIHOKER

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. e040648
Author(s):  
Nanna Lind ◽  
Dorte Lindqvist Hansen ◽  
Signe Sætre Rasmussen ◽  
Kirsten Nørgaard

IntroductionMedical treatment options for type 2 diabetes (T2D) have increased over the last decade and enhance the possibility of individualised treatment strategies where insulin is still one of them. In spite of the advancements in treatment options, less than one-third of the population with T2D obtain their optimal glycaemic goal. In persons with type 1 diabetes, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has shown to be the most important driver for improvement in glycaemic control, even more than insulin-pump therapy. The use of technology in T2D has only been investigated in few studies.The overall objective of the research study is to examine the effectiveness of the use of CGM versus self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in persons with insulin-treated T2D on glycaemic variables and patient-reported outcomes on treatment satisfaction, health behaviour and well-being. The independent effect of peer support will also be studied.Methods and analysisThe study is a single centre, prospective, randomised, open-labelled, three-armed study with the randomisation 2:1:2 in group A with CGM, group B with CGM and peer support, and group C as a control group with SMBG. The participants receive a training course unique for the allocation group. The study runs for 12 months and includes 100 adult participants with insulin-treated T2D, treated at the outpatient clinic at Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen. Primary outcome is difference in change in time in range. Recruitment begins in August 2020 and ends in July 2021. Final 12-month follow-up is anticipated to be in August 2022.Ethics and disseminationThe study will be carried out in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration and is approved by the Scientific Ethics Committee of the Capital Region (H-20000843). Data collection and handling will be performed in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation and is approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency (J-2020-100). Dissemination will be in international peer-reviewed journals, conferences and a plain-language summary for participants.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT04331444).Protocol versionV.3, 11 December 2020.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document