首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>British Medical Journal >Double blind clinical and laboratory study of hypoglycaemia with human and porcine insulin in diabetic patients reporting hypoglycaemia unawareness after transferring to human insulin.
【2h】

Double blind clinical and laboratory study of hypoglycaemia with human and porcine insulin in diabetic patients reporting hypoglycaemia unawareness after transferring to human insulin.

机译:对患有糖尿病患者的低血糖进行双盲临床和实验室研究这些糖尿病患者在转移至人胰岛素后仍不了解低血糖情况。

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

OBJECTIVES--To compare awareness of hypoglycaemia and physiological responses to hypoglycaemia with human and porcine insulin in diabetic patients who reported loss of hypoglycaemia awareness after transferring to human insulin. DESIGN--Double blind randomised crossover study of clinical experience and physiological responses during slow fall hypoglycaemic clamping with porcine and human insulin. SETTING--Clinical investigation unit of teaching hospital recruiting from diabetes clinics of five teaching hospitals and one district general hospital. SUBJECTS--17 patients with insulin dependent diabetes mellitus of more than five years' duration who had reported altered hypoglycaemia awareness within three months of transferring to human insulin. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--Glycaemic control and frequency of hypoglycaemic episodes during two months' treatment with each insulin. Glucose thresholds for physiological and symptomatic responses during clamping. RESULTS--Glycaemic control did not change with either insulin. 136 hypoglycaemic episodes (eight severe) were reported with human insulin and 149 (nine severe) with porcine insulin (95% confidence interval -4 to 2.5, p = 0.63). 20 episodes of biochemical hypoglycaemia occurred with human insulin versus 18 with porcine insulin (-0.8 to 1, p = 0.78). During controlled hypoglycaemia the mean adrenaline response was 138 nmol/l/240 min for both insulins; neurohormonal responses were triggered at 3.0 (SE 0.2) versus 3.1 (0.2) mmol/l of glucose for adrenaline and 2.5 (0.1) versus 2.5 (0.1) mmol/l for subjective awareness. CONCLUSIONS--These data suggest that human insulin per se does not affect the presentation of hypoglycaemia or the neurohumoral, symptomatic, and cognitive function responses to hypoglycaemia in insulin dependent diabetic patients with a history of hypoglycaemia unawareness.
机译:目的-比较报告有转移至人胰岛素后低血糖意识丧失的糖尿病患者对低血糖的认识以及对人胰岛素和猪胰岛素对低血糖的生理反应。设计-猪和人胰岛素缓慢降血糖夹持期间的临床经验和生理反应的双盲随机交叉研究。地点-从5家教学医院和1家地区综合医院的糖尿病诊所招募的教学医院的临床调查单位。受试者--17持续时间超过五年的胰岛素依赖型糖尿病患者在转用人胰岛素后的三个月内报告了低血糖意识的改变。主要观察指标-每种胰岛素治疗两个月期间的血糖控制和降血糖发作频率。钳夹过程中生理和症状反应的葡萄糖阈值。结果-两种胰岛素的血糖控制均未改变。用人胰岛素报道了136次低血糖发作(严重8次),用猪胰岛素报道了149次(严重9次)(95%置信区间-4至2.5,p = 0.63)。人胰岛素发生20次生化性低血糖,而猪胰岛素发生18次(-0.8至1,p = 0.78)。在控制性低血糖期间,两种胰岛素的平均肾上腺素反应均为138 nmol / l / 240分钟;对于肾上腺素,以3.0(SE 0.2)vs. 3.1(0.2)mmol / l的葡萄糖触发神经激素反应,而对于主观知觉,则以2.5(0.1)vs 2.5(0.1)mmol / l触发神经激素反应。结论-这些数据表明人胰岛素本身不影响低血糖病史的胰岛素依赖型糖尿病患者的低血糖表现或对低血糖的神经体液,症状和认知功能反应。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号