首页> 外文期刊>Journal of endocrinological investigation. >Efficacy and safety of closed-loop insulin delivery versus sensor-augmented pump in the treatment of adults with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials
【24h】

Efficacy and safety of closed-loop insulin delivery versus sensor-augmented pump in the treatment of adults with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials

机译:闭环胰岛素输送与传感器增强泵治疗成人 1 型糖尿病的疗效和安全性:随机对照试验的系统评价和荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Background Controversy remains regarding whether closed-loop (CL) insulin delivery or insulin sensor-augmented pump (SAP) delivery is more efficient for clinical treatment. Therefore, we aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of CL insulin delivery systems versus insulin SAP delivery for adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and other databases were searched for related articles, and we analyzed the average blood glucose (BG), time in range (TIR), and adverse effects (AEs) as primary endpoints to evaluate efficacy and safety. Results Of 1616 articles, 12 randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the final analysis. Regarding BG control efficacy, CL insulin delivery resulted better outcomes than SAP therapy with regard to the average BG value, which was detected and recorded by continuous glucose monitoring (mean difference MDmmol/L: - 0.25 95 confidence interval CI - 0.42 to - 0.08, p = 0.003); TIR 3.9-10 mmol/L(MD : 7.91 95 CI 4.45-11.37, p< 0.00001). Similar results were observed for the secondary outcomes including low blood glucose index (LBGI) (MD: - 0.41 95 CI - 0.55 to - 0.26, p<0.00001), high blood glucose index (HBGI) (MD: - 2.56 95 CI - 3.38 to - 1.74, p<0.00001), and standard deviation (SD) of glucose variability (MD mmol/L: -0.25 95 CI - 0.44 to - 0.06, p = 0.01). Furthermore, SAP therapy was associated with more adverse effects (risk ratio: 0.20 95 CI 0.07-0.52, p = 0.001) than CL insulin delivery, and one of the most common adverse effects was hypoglycemia. Conclusions CL insulin delivery appears to be a better treatment method than SAP therapy for adults with T1D because of its increased BG control efficacy and decreased number of hypoglycemic events.
机译:背景 关于闭环 (CL) 胰岛素递送或胰岛素传感器增强泵 (SAP) 递送是否对临床治疗更有效,仍然存在争议。因此,我们旨在比较 CL 胰岛素递送系统与胰岛素 SAP 递送对成人 1 型糖尿病 (T1D) 的有效性和安全性。方法 检索Embase、Ovid MEDLINE、PubMed、ScienceDirect、Scopus、Cochrane Library等数据库相关文章,分析平均血糖(BG)、范围内时间(TIR)和不良反应(AEs)作为主要终点,评价疗效和安全性。结果 在1616篇文献中,纳入12项随机对照试验(RCTs)为最终分析。关于血糖控制效果,CL胰岛素给药在平均血糖值方面比SAP治疗产生更好的结果,通过连续血糖监测检测和记录(平均差[MD][mmol/L]:-0.25 95%置信区间[CI]-0.42至-0.08,p = 0.003);TIR 3.9-10 mmol/L(MD [%]: 7.91 95% CI 4.45-11.37, p< 0.00001)。次要结局也观察到类似的结果,包括低血糖指数(LBGI)(MD:-0.41 95%CI - 0.55至-0.26,p<0.00001)、高血糖指数(HBGI)(MD:-2.56 95%CI - 3.38至-1.74,p<0.00001)和葡萄糖变异性标准差(SD)(MD [mmol/L]:-0.25 95%CI - 0.44至-0.06,p = 0.01)。此外,SAP治疗与更多的不良反应相关(风险比:0.20 95%CI 0。07-0.52,p=0.001)比CL胰岛素给药,最常见的不良反应之一是低血糖。结论 对于成人T1D患者,CL胰岛素给药似乎是比SAP治疗更好的治疗方法,因为它具有提高血糖控制效果和减少低血糖事件次数的方法。

著录项

获取原文

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