Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination on Glycemia in Individuals With Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes: Substudy of the COVAC-DM Study

Vaccination and potentially related side effects might impact glucose management in people with diabetes. In this study, we investigated effects of COVID-19 vaccination on glycemia assessed by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. <br> 74 participants of the ongoing multicenter prospective COVAC-DM-study, investigating the immune response to COVID-19 vaccines in people with diabetes, were willing to participate in this CGM sub-study. Time spent in glycemic ranges (time in range [TIR] 70-180 mg/dL; time below range [TBR] <70 mg/dL and time above range [TAR] >180 mg/dL) was assessed daily from two days prior to three days after the first COVID-19 vaccination. Participants were asked to document side effects in response to vaccination, insulin injections, and carbohydrate intake.<br> 58 participants with type 1 (27 female, mean age 39.5 years, HbA1c 57 ± 12 mmol/mol) and 16 with type 2 diabetes (9 females, mean age 60.6 years, HbA1c 63 ± 11mmol/mol) were included in this study. The mean TIR did not change on the day of the vaccination and the following 3 days (p>0.05). In people with type 1 diabetes, the TIR (p=0.033) and the TAR (p= 0.043) deteriorated on days with side effects as compared to those without. <br> Side effects occurring after COVID-19 vaccination significantly reduce the TIR and increase the TAR in people with type 1 diabetes, while no impact was observed in people with type 2 diabetes.

Impact of COVID-19 Vaccination on Glycemia in Individuals With Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes: Substudy of the COVAC-DM Study

Vaccination and potentially related side effects might impact glucose management in people with diabetes. In this study, we investigated effects of COVID-19 vaccination on glycemia assessed by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. <br> 74 participants of the ongoing multicenter prospective COVAC-DM-study, investigating the immune response to COVID-19 vaccines in people with diabetes, were willing to participate in this CGM sub-study. Time spent in glycemic ranges (time in range [TIR] 70-180 mg/dL; time below range [TBR] <70 mg/dL and time above range [TAR] >180 mg/dL) was assessed daily from two days prior to three days after the first COVID-19 vaccination. Participants were asked to document side effects in response to vaccination, insulin injections, and carbohydrate intake.<br> 58 participants with type 1 (27 female, mean age 39.5 years, HbA1c 57 ± 12 mmol/mol) and 16 with type 2 diabetes (9 females, mean age 60.6 years, HbA1c 63 ± 11mmol/mol) were included in this study. The mean TIR did not change on the day of the vaccination and the following 3 days (p>0.05). In people with type 1 diabetes, the TIR (p=0.033) and the TAR (p= 0.043) deteriorated on days with side effects as compared to those without. <br> Side effects occurring after COVID-19 vaccination significantly reduce the TIR and increase the TAR in people with type 1 diabetes, while no impact was observed in people with type 2 diabetes.

Preoperative Management of Diabetic Patients, an Overview

Glycemic control is critical in the perioperative setting, especially in diabetic patients. The consequences of surgical tension and anesthesia on blood sugar levels are distinct, and should be considered in order to maintain optimal glycemic control. Each stage of surgery presents its own set of challenges in terms of keeping glucose levels within the target range. Furthermore, there are some surgical conditions that necessitate specific glucose management protocols. Authors hope to highlight the most crucial factors to consider when developing a perioperative diabetic regimen, while still allowing for specific adjustments based on sound clinical judgement. Overall, by carefully managing glycemic control in perioperative patients, we may be able to reduce morbidity and mortality while improving surgical outcomes.

A feed-centric hypoglycaemia pathway ensures appropriate care escalation in at-risk infants

BackgroundThere is a lack of clarity of what constitutes the starting point of a clinical pathway for infants at-risk of hypoglycaemia. Glucose-centric pathways (GCP) identify low glucose in the first 2 hours of life that may not represent clinical hypoglycaemia and can lead to inappropriate glucose management with infusions and medications.ObjectiveTo study the impact of a feed-centric pathway (FCP) on the number of admissions for hypoglycaemia to level 2 special care nursery (SCN) and the need for parenteral glucose/medications, compared to GCP.MethodsThis project was conducted over 2 years, before and after switching from a GCP to FCP in our institution. FCP involves skin-to-skin care, early breast feeding, checking glucose at 2 hours and use of buccal glucose. The primary outcome was the number of SCN admissions for hypoglycaemia. Secondary outcomes include the number of infants needing intravenous glucose, medications and length of SCN stay.ResultsOf 23 786 live births, 4438 newborns were screened. We screened more infants at-risk for hypoglycaemia using the FCP (GCP:1462/11969, 12.2% vs FCP:2976/11817, 25.1%) but significantly reduced SCN admissions (GCP:246/1462, 16.8% vs FCP:102/2976, 3.4%; p<0.0001). Fewer but proportionally more FCP newborns required intravenous glucose (GCP: 136/246, 55% vs FCP: 88/102, 86%; p=0.000). Compared with GCP, FCP reduced the total duration of stay in SCN by 104 days per annum, reducing the cost of care. However, the mean length of SCN stay for FCP was higher (GCP:2.43 days vs FCP:3.49 days; p=0.001). There were no readmissions for neonatal hypoglycaemia to our institution.ConclusionThe use of FCP safely reduced SCN admissions, averted avoidable escalation of care and helped identify infants who genuinely required intravenous glucose and SCN care, allowing more efficient utilisation of healthcare resources.

Association between dysglycemia and mortality by diabetes status and risk factors of dysglycemia in critically ill patients: a retrospective study

Aims Dysglycemia, including the three domains hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and increased glycemic variability (GV), is associated with high mortality among critically ill patients. However, this association differs by diabetes status, and reports in this regard are limited. This study aimed to evaluate the associations between the three dysglycemia domains and mortality in critically ill patients by diabetes status and determined the contributing factors for dysglycemia. Methods This retrospective study included 958 critically ill patients (admitted to the ICU) with or without DM. Dysglycemia was defined as abnormality of any of the three dimensions. We evaluated the effects of the three domains of glucose control on mortality using binary logistic regression and then adjusted for confounders. The associations between dysglycemia and other variables were investigated using cumulative logistic regression analysis. Result GV independently and similarly affected mortality in both groups after adjustment for confounders (DM: odds ratio [OR], 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-1.08; p <0.001; non-DM: OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.03-1.11; p = 0.002). Hypoglycemia was strongly associated with ICU mortality among patients without DM (3.12; 1.76-5.53; p <0.001) and less so among those with DM (1.18; 0.49-2.83; p = 0.72). Hyperglycemia was non-significantly associated with mortality in both groups. However, the effects of dysglycemia seemed cumulative. The factors contributing to dysglycemia included disease severity, insulin treatment, glucocorticoid use, serum albumin level, total parenteral nutrition, duration of diabetes, elevated procalcitonin level, and need for mechanical ventilation and renal replacement therapy. Conclusion The association between the three dimensions of dysglycemia and mortality varied by diabetes status. Dysglycemia in critical patients is associated with excess mortality; however, glucose management in patients should be specific to the patient’s need considering the diabetes status and broader dimensions. The identified factors for dysglycemia could be used for risk assessment in glucose management requirement in critically ill patients, which may improve clinical outcomes.