How Can We Realize the Clinical Benefits of Continuous Glucose Monitoring?

Controlling glycemia in diabetes remains key to prevent complications in this condition. However, glucose levels can undergo large fluctuations secondary to daily activities, consequently creating management difficulties. The current review summarizes the basics of glucose management in diabetes by addressing the main glycemic parameters. The advantages and limitation of HbA1c, the gold standard measure of glucose control, are discussed together with the clinical importance of hypoglycemia and glycemic variability. The review subsequently moves focus to glucose monitoring techniques in diabetes, assessing advantages and limitations. Monitoring glucose levels is crucial for effective and safe adjustment of hypoglycemic therapy, particularly in insulin users. Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), based on capillary glucose testing, remains one of the most widely used methods to monitor glucose levels, given the relative accuracy, familiarity, and manageable costs. However, patient inconvenience and the sporadic nature of SMBG limit clinical effectiveness of this approach. In contrast, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides a more comprehensive picture of glucose levels, but these systems are expensive and require constant calibration which, together with concerns over accuracy of earlier devices, restrict CGM use to special groups of patients. The newer flash continuous glucose monitoring (FCGM) system, which is more affordable than conventional CGM devices and does not require calibration, offers an alternative glucose monitoring strategy that comprehensively analyzes glucose profile while sparing patients the inconvenience of capillary glucose testing for therapy adjustment or CGM calibration. The fast development of new CGM devices will gradually displace SMBG as the main glucose testing method. Avoiding the inconvenience of SMBG and optimizing glycemia through alternative glucose testing strategies will help to reduce the risk of complications and improve quality of life in patients with diabetes

Application of sebomics for the analysis of residual skin surface components to detect potential biomarkers of type-1 diabetes mellitus

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Te images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.Metabolic imbalance in chronic diseases such as type-1 diabetes may lead to detectable perturbations in the molecular composition of residual skin surface components (RSSC). This study compared the accumulation rate and the composition of RSSC in type-1 diabetic patients with those in matched controls in order to identify potential biomarkers of the disease. Samples of RSSC were collected from the foreheads of type-1 diabetic (n = 55) and non-diabetic (n = 58) volunteers. Samples were subsequently analysed to identify individual components (sebomic analysis). There was no significant difference in the rate of accumulation of RSSC between type-1 diabetics and controls. In terms of molecular composition, 171 RSSC components were common to both groups, 27 were more common in non-diabetics and 18 were more common in type-1 diabetic patients. Statistically significant (P < 0.05) differences between diabetic and non-diabetic volunteers were observed in the recovered amounts of one diacylglyceride (m/z 594), six triacylglycerides (m/z 726-860) and six free fatty acids (m/z 271-345). These findings indicate that sebomic analysis can identify differences in the molecular composition of RSSC components between type-1 diabetic and non-diabetic individuals. Further work is required to determine the practical utility and identity of these potential biomarkers.Peer reviewedFinal Published versio

Screening intervals for diabetic retinopathy and incidence of visual loss: a systematic review

Screening for diabetic retinopathy can help to prevent this complication, but evidence regarding frequency of screening is uncertain. This paper systematically reviews the published literature on the relationship between screening intervals for diabetic retinopathy and the incidence of visual loss. The PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched until December 2012. Twenty five studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria, as these assessed the incidence/prevalence of sight‐threatening diabetic retinopathy in relation to screening frequency. The included studies comprised 15 evaluations of real‐world screening programmes, three studies modelling the natural history of diabetic retinopathy and seven cost‐effectiveness studies. In evaluations of diabetic retinopathy screening programmes, the appropriate screening interval ranged from one to four years, in people with no retinopathy at baseline. Despite study heterogeneity, the overall tendency observed in these programmes was that 2‐year screening intervals among people with no diabetic retinopathy at diagnosis were not associated with high incidence of sight‐threatening diabetic retinopathy. The modelling studies (non‐economic and economic) assessed a range of screening intervals (1–5 years). The aggregated evidence from both the natural history and cost‐effectiveness models favors a screening interval >1 year, but ≤2 years. Such an interval would be appropriate, safe and cost‐effective for people with no diabetic retinopathy at diagnosis, while screening intervals ≤1 year would be preferable for people with pre‐existing diabetic retinopathy. A 2‐year screening interval for people with no sight threatening diabetic retinopathy at diagnosis may be safely adopted. For patients with pre‐existing diabetic retinopathy, a shorter interval ≤1 year is warranted.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/100323/1/dme12274.pd

Indications for and Utilization of ACE Inhibitors in Older Individuals with Diabetes

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) improve cardiovascular outcomes in high-risk individuals with diabetes. Despite the marked benefit, it is unknown what percentage of patients with diabetes would benefit from and what percentage actually receive this preventive therapy. OBJECTIVES : To examine the proportion of older diabetic patients with indications for ACE or ARB (ACE/ARB). To generate national estimates of ACE/ARB use. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS : Survey of 742 individuals≥55 years (representing 8.02 million U.S. adults) self-reporting diabetes in the 1999 to 2002 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. MEASUREMENTS : Prevalence of guideline indications (albuminuria, cardiovascular disease, hypertension) and other cardiac risk factors (hyperlipidemia, smoking) with potential benefit from ACE/ARB. Prevalence of ACE/ARB use overall and by clinical indication. RESULTS : Ninety-two percent had guideline indications for ACE/ARB. Including additional cardiac risk factors, the entire (100%) U.S. noninstitutionalized older population with diabetes had indications for ACE/ARB. Overall, 43% of the population received ACE/ARB. Hypertension was associated with higher rates of ACE/ARB use, while albuminuria and cardiovascular disease were not. As the number of indications increased, rates of use increased, however, the maximum prevalence of use was only 53% in individuals with 4 or more indications for ACE/ARB. CONCLUSIONS : ACE/ARB is indicated in virtually all older individuals with diabetes; yet, national rates of use are disturbingly low and key risk factors (albuminuria and cardiovascular disease) are being missed. To improve quality of diabetes care nationally, use of ACE/ARB therapy by ALL older diabetics may be a desirable addition to diabetes performance measurement sets.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/74734/1/j.1525-1497.2006.00351.x.pd

Perspectives of patients with type 1 or insulin-treated type 2 diabetes on self-monitoring of blood glucose: a qualitative study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), including self-regulation, is an important tool to achieve good glycemic control. However, many patients measure their glucose concentrations less often than is recommended. This study investigates patients' perspectives of SMBG and all relevant aspects influencing SMBG in patients with type 1 and insulin-treated type 2 diabetes.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In depth interviews were conducted with 13 patients with type 1 diabetes from an outpatient clinic and 15 patients with type 2 diabetes from general practices. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed using the Grounded Theory approach.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A wide variety of SMBG was encountered. Perceptions, goals of SMBG and personal and contextual factors were identified, influencing the respondents' perspective of SMBG, and leading to this variety. Respondents experienced a discrepancy between their own and the professionals' perceptions and goals. Respondents' perception of SMBG ranged along a continuum from 'friend' to 'foe'. With respect to the goals, the respondents experienced tension between achieving good glycemic control and quality of life, and deliberately made their own choices. The performance of SMBG was tailored to their perceptions and personal goals. Personal and contextual factors such as hypo- or hyper (un)awareness, knowledge, and contact with professionals acted as either facilitating factors or as barriers to SMBG, depending on the respondents' perspective. A SMBG model was developed providing a representation of the factors and their interrelations.</p> <p>Respondents with type 1 diabetes seemed more resigned to their situation and SMBG was more integrated into their lives.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>From the patients' perspective, professionals positively present SMBG as a 'friend' in order to achieve strict glycemic control. Whereas patients can also perceive SMBG as a 'foe'. They primarily seek a personal balance between achieving glycemic control and quality of life, leading them to deliberately make other choices regarding SMBG performance than was recommended. Gaining insight and discussing all factors affecting SMBG will help professionals and patients come to mutually agreed goals and to tailor the performance of SMBG to the individual patient. This should result in a more optimal use of SMBG, an improved quality of life, and improved clinical parameters.</p

Diabetic polyneuropathies: update on research definition, diagnostic criteria and estimation of severity

Prior to a joint meeting of the Neurodiab Association and International Symposium on Diabetic Neuropathy held in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 13‐18 October 2009, Solomon Tesfaye, Sheffield, UK, convened a panel of neuromuscular experts to provide an update on polyneuropathies associated with diabetes (Toronto Consensus Panels on DPNs, 2009). Herein, we provide definitions of typical and atypical diabetic polyneuropathies (DPNs), diagnostic criteria, and approaches to diagnose sensorimotor polyneuropathy as well as to estimate severity. Diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSPN), or typical DPN, usually develops on long‐standing hyperglycaemia, consequent metabolic derangements and microvessel alterations. It is frequently associated with microvessel retinal and kidney disease—but other causes must be excluded. By contrast, atypical DPNs are intercurrent painful and autonomic small‐fibre polyneuropathies. Recognizing that there is a need to detect and estimate severity of DSPN validly and reproducibly, we define subclinical DSPN using nerve conduction criteria and define possible, probable, and confirmed clinical levels of DSPN. For conduct of epidemiologic surveys and randomized controlled trials, it is necessary to pre‐specify which attributes of nerve conduction are to be used, the criterion for diagnosis, reference values, correction for applicable variables, and the specific criterion for DSPN. Herein, we provide the performance characteristics of several criteria for the diagnosis of sensorimotor polyneuropathy in healthy subject‐ and diabetic subject cohorts. Also outlined here are staged and continuous approaches to estimate severity of DSPN. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/87100/1/1226_ftp.pd

Diagnostic criteria for diabetes revisited: making use of combined criteria

BACKGROUND: Existing cut-offs for fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and post-load glucose (2hPG) criteria are not equivalent in the diagnosis of diabetes and glucose intolerance. Adjusting cut-offs of single measurements have not helped so we undertook this project to see if they could be complementary. METHODS: We performed oral glucose tolerance tests and mean levels of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measurements on 43 patients referred to a diabetes clinic for possible diabetes. Results of single and combined use of the FPG and 2hPG criteria were evaluated against the levels of HbA1c and results re-interpreted in the light of existing reports in the literature. RESULTS: Our results confirm that the FPG and the 2hPG, being specific and sensitive respectively for the presence of glucose intolerance or diabetes, are not equivalent. They are shown to be indeed complementary and a re-definition of diagnostic criteria based on their combined use is proposed. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that altering single measurement cut-offs for the diagnosis of diabetes and altered glucose tolerance will not result in better outcomes. We present the case for a combined criteria in the diagnosis and definition of diabetes with a FPG≥7 mmol/L AND 2-hour glucose ≥7.8 mmol/L being used to define diabetes while a FPG<7 mmol/L AND 2-hour glucose <7.8 mmol/L being used to define normality. Discordant values will define impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). This proposal requires prospective evaluation in a large cohort

Intraocular pressure and aqueous humor flow during a euglycemic-hyperinsulinemic clamp in patients with type 1 diabetes and microvascular complications

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Microvascular complications, including retinopathy and nephropathy are seen with type 1 diabetes. It is unknown whether functional changes in aqueous humor flow or intraocular pressure (IOP) develop in parallel with these complications. This study was designed to test the hypothesis that clinical markers of microvascular complications coexist with the alteration in aqueous humor flow and IOP.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Ten patients with type 1 diabetes and ten healthy age- and weight-matched controls were studied. Aqueous flow was measured by fluorophotometry during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (insulin 2 mU/kg/min). Intraocular pressure was measured by tonometry at -10, 90 and 240 minutes from the start of the clamp, and outflow facility was measured by tonography at 240 minutes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>During conditions of identical glucose and insulin concentrations, mean aqueous flow was lower by 0.58 μl/min in the diabetes group compared to controls (2.58 ± 0.65 versus 3.16 ± 0.66 μl/min, respectively, mean ± SD, p = 0.07) but statistical significance was not reached. Before the clamp, IOP was higher in the diabetes group (22.6 ± 3.0 mm Hg) than in the control group (19.3 ± 1.8 mm Hg, p = 0.01) but at 90 minutes into the clamp, and for the remainder of the study, IOP was reduced in the diabetes group to the level of the control group. Ocular pulse amplitude and outflow facility were not different between groups. Systolic blood pressure was significantly higher in the diabetes group, but diastolic and mean arterial pressures were not different.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We conclude that compared to healthy participants, patients with type 1 diabetes having microalbuminuria and retinopathy have higher IOPs that are normalized by hyperinsulinemia. During the clamp, a reduction in aqueous flow was not statistically significant.</p

Association between vascular endothelial growth factor and hypertension in children and adolescents type I diabetes mellitus

The aim of the study was to analyse the relationship between the serum level of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and the incidence of hypertension (HT) in children and adolescents with type I diabetes mellitus (T1DM). One hundred and five patients with T1DM were enrolled in the study. The control group consisted of 30 healthy controls. All the T1DM patients were subjected to biochemical analyses, ophthalmologic examination and 24-h blood pressure monitoring. Besides, all the patients and healthy controls had serum VEGF levels measured with the use of the ELISA methodology. The essence of our research is that patients with T1DM and HT and with microalbuminuria (MA) and diabetic retinopathy (DR) (MA/DR) are characterized by a significantly higher level of VEGF (340.23±93.22 pg ml–1) in blood serum in comparison with the group of T1DM patients without HT and MA/DR (183.6±96.6 pg ml–1) and with healthy controls (145.32±75.58 pg ml–1). In addition, the VEGF level was significantly higher in T1DM patients, who presented all three complications, that is HT, retinopathy and MA in comparison with T1DM patients without HT, but with MA/DR (P=0.036). On the other hand, no statistically significant differences (P=0.19) were noted in the level of VEGF in serum between T1DM patients without HT and MA/DR and the healthy control group. At a further stage of analysis, using the method of multiple regression, it was shown that systolic pressure, HbA1c and duration of disease are independent factors influencing the concentration of VEGF. Summarizing, the measurement of VEGF serum levels allows for the identification of groups of patients who have the highest risk of HT and, subsequently, progression of vascular complications