RESUMEN
Objective:To investigate the effects of insulin glargine administration by jet injection versus conventional insulin pen on glucose profile using professional mode flash glucose monitoring(FGM) system in type 2 diabetic patients with poor glucose control.Methods:In this randomized, controlled, crossover study, 40 patients with T2DM who treated with insulin glargine were enrolled. The patients were randomly divided into group A(jet injector-conventional pen, n=20) and group B(conventional pen-jet injector, n=20). Each patient wore FreeStyle Libre sensor from day 4 to day 17. The specialist nurse instructed patients how to master the injection techniques. Professional FGM system was applied to assess glucose profile. Results:The fasting blood glucose(FBG) of the enrolled patients was(9.37±1.84) mmol/L. In contrast to conventional insulin pen, treatment with the jet injector significantly decreased the 24h MBG [(9.06±2.13 vs 9.98±2.67) mmol/L, P=0.001], MaxBG [(16.69±3.01 vs 17.95±3.48) mmol/L, P=0.001], AUC>10 mmol/L [95.93(21.12, 129.02) vs 142.66( 27.88, 198.46), P=0.002], TAR(31.10±21.89 vs 39.49±25.93, P=0.003), MAGE and SDBG. It was observed that patients using jet injector had significant increased TIR(65.94±20.47 vs 58.32±25.00, P=0.001). There were no difference in the risk of hypoglycaemia between two groups. Conclusion:Insulin jet injector was more effective than the insulin pen on glycaemic control and glucose fluctuation without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetic patients with uncontrolled glycemia.
RESUMEN
Objective To investigate the effect of flash glucose monitoring (FGM) on ambulatory glucose profile of only oral antidiabetic drugs treated patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods Twenty-eight type 2 diabetic mellitus patients with only oral antidiabetic drugs treatment from August 2017 to January 2018 were enrolled. All the patients were exposed to FGM for 14 d without changing the original treatment and encouraged to manage self-behavior by adjusting diet and activity based on the blood glucose data obtained from the real-time scanning. The changes in glucose profile during the FGM period were observed, including estimated glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), standard deviation of blood glucose, variable coefficient of blood glucose, mean amplitude of glycemic excursions, time in range (blood glucose 3.9 to 10.0 mmol/L), area under the curve hyperglycemia (blood glucose> 10.0 mmol/L) and area under the curve hypoglycemia (blood glucose<3.9 mmol/L). The blood glucose levels on second day and thirteenth day were used as baseline and end point respectively. Results All of the 28 patients did not change their anti-diabetic drug therapy and there were no adverse events occurred. The estimated HbA1c was significantly lower than the baseline HbA1c: (6.90 ± 1.48)% vs. (7.57 ± 1.35)%, and there was statistical difference (P = 0.004). The standard deviation of blood glucose, variable coefficient of blood glucose, mean amplitude of glycemic excursions, area under the curve hyperglycemia and area under the curve hypoglycemia at end were significantly lower than those at baseline: (2.07 ± 0.86) mmol/L vs. (2.44 ± 0.86) mmol/L, 0.26 ± 0.11 vs. 0.30 ± 0.11, (5.32 ± 2.75) mmol/L vs. (6.76 ± 3.06) mmol/L, 265 (0, 1 310) vs. 351 (107, 2 177) and 0 (0, 0) vs. 0 (0, 19), the time in range at end was significantly higher than that at baseline: (1 069 ± 386) min vs. (921 ± 449) min, and there were statistical differences (P＜0.05 or＜0.01). The rate of scanning was (12.92 ± 4.87) times/d. Conclusions FGM could be applied by type 2 diabetic mellitus patients to make self-glycemic management without changing therapy, reduce the estimated HbA1c,and hypoglycemia, and improve the glucose fluctuations, which may result from real-time scanning to find abnormal glycemia and adjust daily behavior.