首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism >Comparison of Inpatient Insulin Regimens with Detemir plus Aspart Versus Neutral Protamine Hagedorn plus Regular in Medical Patients with Type 2 Diabetes
【2h】

Comparison of Inpatient Insulin Regimens with Detemir plus Aspart Versus Neutral Protamine Hagedorn plus Regular in Medical Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

机译:2型糖尿病医疗患者住院胰岛素治疗方案与DetemirAspart和中性鱼精蛋白Hagedorn加常规药物的比较

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

>Background: Studies comparing the use of basal bolus with insulin analogs vs. split-mixed regimens with human insulins in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes are lacking.>Research Design and Methods: In a controlled multicenter trial, we randomized 130 nonsurgical patients with blood glucose (BG) between 140 and 400 mg/dl to receive detemir once daily and aspart before meals (n = 67) or neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) and regular insulin twice daily (n = 63). Insulin dose was started at 0.4 U/kg · d for BG between 140 and 200 mg/dl or 0.5 U/kg · d for BG 201-400 mg/dl. Major study outcomes included differences in mean daily BG levels and frequency of hypoglycemic events between treatment groups.>Results: Glycemic control improved similarly in both groups from a mean daily BG of 228 ± 54 and 223 ± 58 mg/dl (P = 0.61) to a mean daily BG level after the first day of 160 ± 38 and 158 ± 51 mg/dl in the detemir/aspart and NPH/regular insulin groups, respectively (P = 0.80). A BG target below 140 mg/dl before meals was achieved in 45% of patients in the detemir/aspart group and 48% in the NPH/regular group (P = 0.86). During treatment, 22 patients (32.8%) in the detemir/aspart group and 16 patients (25.4%) in the NPH/regular group had at least one episode of hypoglycemia (BG <60 mg/dl) during the hospital stay (P = 0.34).>Conclusions: Treatment with basal/bolus regimen with detemir once daily and aspart before meals results in equivalent glycemic control and no differences in the frequency of hypoglycemia compared to a split-mixed regimen of NPH and regular insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes.
机译:>背景:尚缺乏对住院的2型糖尿病患者使用基底推注与胰岛素类似物的比较以及将混合胰岛素与人胰岛素混合使用的研究。>研究设计和方法:在一项受控的多中心试验中,我们将130例血糖(BG)在140至400 mg / dl之间的非手术患者随机分为两组,分别每天接受一次地特米和餐前服用门冬(n = 67)或中性鱼精蛋白Hagedorn(NPH)和常规胰岛素,每天两次(n = 63)。对于140至200 mg / dl的BG,胰岛素剂量开始于0.4 U / kg·d;对于201-400 mg / dl的BG,胰岛素剂量开始于0.5 U / kg·d。主要研究结果包括各治疗组之间的每日平均BG水平和降血糖事件发生频率的差异。>结果:两组的血糖控制水平相似,从每日平均BG 228±54和223±58 mg /地特米/门冬组和NPH /常规胰岛素组在第一天后的每日平均BG水平分别为dl(P = 0.61)和160±38和158±51 mg / dl(P = 0.80)。地特米尔/阿司匹林组中有45%的患者餐前BG目标低于140 mg / dl,NPH /常规组中有48%的患者达到了BG目标(P = 0.86)。在治疗期间,地特米/阿司匹林组22例(32.8%)和NPH /常规组16例(25.4%)在住院期间出现至少一次低血糖发作(BG <60 mg / dl)(P = 0.34)。>结论:与NPH混合分流方案和常规方案相比,每日一次和餐前天天一次地底/推注方案与地特米尔的治疗可实现等效的血糖控制,低血糖发生频率无差异2型糖尿病患者的胰岛素。

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