Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 39
Filter
1.
Diabetes Metab Syndr ; 16(2): 102407, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1634135

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Glycemic control in critical illness has been linked to outcomes. We sought to investigate if COVID pneumonia was causing disrupted glycemic control compared to historically similar diseases. METHODS: At Intermountain Healthcare, a 23-hospital healthcare system in the intermountain west, we performed a multicenter, retrospective cohort observational study. We compared 13,268 hospitalized patients with COVID pneumonia to 6673 patients with non -COVID-pneumonia. RESULTS: Patients with COVID-19 were younger had fewer comorbidities, had lower mortality and greater length of hospital stay. Our regression models demonstrated that daily insulin dose, indexed for weight, was associated with COVID-19, age, diabetic status, HgbA1c, admission SOFA, ICU length of stay and receipt of corticosteroids. There was significant interaction between a diagnosis of diabetes and having COVID-19. Time in range for our IV insulin protocol was not correlated with having COVID after adjustment. It was correlated with ICU length of stay, diabetic control (HgbA1C) and prior history of diabetes. Among patients with subcutaneous (SQ) insulin only percent of glucose checks in range was correlated with diabetic status, having Covid-19, HgbA1c, total steroids given and Elixhauser comorbidity score even when controlled for other factors. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 pneumonia who receive insulin for glycemic control require both more SQ and IV insulin than the non-COVID-19 pneumonia counterparts. Patients with COVID-19 who received SQ insulin only had a lower percent of glucose checks in range.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Glycemic Control/statistics & numerical data , Hyperglycemia/epidemiology , Pneumonia/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Aged , COVID-19/blood , Cohort Studies , Comorbidity , Diabetes Mellitus/blood , Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Glycemic Control/methods , Hospitalization , Humans , Hyperglycemia/drug therapy , Insulin/administration & dosage , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Pneumonia/blood , Retrospective Studies
2.
Arch Pediatr ; 29(1): 27-29, 2022 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1561682

ABSTRACT

AIM: The COVID-19 pandemic has forced governments to impose lockdown policies, thus impacting patients with chronic diseases, such as type 1 diabetes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of lockdown on glycemic control in type 1 diabetes patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated patients using a continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion device during the nationwide lockdown. Children and adolescents aged 2-18 years followed up at the Pediatric Endocrinology Unit of Hospitalar São João in Portugal were included in the study. We collected data on the age, weight, insulin doses, and glycemic control of the patients before and after the restrictions. RESULTS: The study included 100 patients, 59 males, with a mean age of 12.5 years. Baseline data showed a suboptimal glycemic control with a median HbA1c of 7.9%. The lockdown was associated with an increase in the body mass index (BMI) of all patients (p = 0.009), particularly girls and older teenagers. Metabolic control deteriorated in the 10-13 age group (p = 0.03), with a 0.4% increase in HbA1c. CONCLUSION: To date, this is the largest study on the impact of lockdown on type 1 diabetes in patients using an insulin pump. The results highlight the importance of physical activity, parental supervision, and continuation of healthcare assistance through telemedicine in young individuals with type 1 diabetes.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Glycemic Control/methods , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Insulin/administration & dosage , Pandemics/prevention & control , Quarantine , Adolescent , Blood Glucose , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/epidemiology , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/analysis , Glycated Hemoglobin A/metabolism , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Infusions, Subcutaneous , Insulin Infusion Systems/adverse effects , Male , Portugal/epidemiology , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab ; 322(1): E44-E53, 2022 01 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1518165

ABSTRACT

In December 2019, a pandemic emerged due to a new coronavirus that imposed various uncertainties and discoveries. It has been reported that diabetes is a risk factor for worst outcomes of COVID-19 and also that SARS-CoV-2 infection was correlated with the occurrence of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) in patients. The aim of this work is to discuss this correlation emphasizing the main case reports from 2020 while exploring the management of DKA during the course of COVID-19. Web of Science, PubMed, and Scopus databases were searched using two sets of Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) search terms or Title/Abstract words: Coronavirus Infections (Coronavirus Infections, Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, COVID-19) and Diabetic Ketoacidosis (Diabetic Ketoacidosis, Diabetic Acidosis, Diabetic Ketosis). There is a clear correlation between COVID-19 and DKA. The SARS-Cov-2 infection may precipitate both a hyperglycemic state and ketoacidosis occurrence in patients with diabetes and nondiabetic patients, which may lead to fatal outcomes. DKA in patients with COVID-19 may increase risk and worse outcomes. Hence, the SARS-Cov-2 infection presents a new perspective toward the management of glycemia and acidosis in patients with diabetes and nondiabetic patients, highlighting the need for rapid interventions to minimize the complications from COVID-19 while reducing its spreading.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Diabetic Ketoacidosis/complications , Blood Glucose/analysis , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , COVID-19/metabolism , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/metabolism , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/metabolism , Diabetic Ketoacidosis/drug therapy , Diabetic Ketoacidosis/metabolism , Humans , Hyperglycemia/complications , Hyperglycemia/drug therapy , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin/administration & dosage , Insulin/therapeutic use , Prognosis , Risk Factors , Telemedicine
4.
Cardiovasc Toxicol ; 22(1): 63-66, 2022 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1465906

ABSTRACT

Intoxication from calcium channel blockers exhibits almost 50% mortality rates. Amlodipine is a long-acting dihydropyridine and inappropriate dosage poses a great threat for profound vasodilation, hypotension, and refractory vasopressor-resistant shock. A 72-year-old woman with unremarkable medical history presented to the emergency department due to amlodipine overdose after a suicide attempt attributed to COVID-19 pandemic severe anxiety disorder. Vital signs at presentation: heart rate 82 beats/ min, arterial pressure 72/55 mmHg, and oxygen saturation 98%. Resuscitation was initiated with intravenous infusion of normal saline 0,9%, noradrenaline, and calcium chloride, while activated charcoal was orally administrated; however, blood pressure remained at 70/45 mmHg. Abruptly, she experienced acute pulmonary edema and was finally intubated. We commenced high-dose insulin infusion with Dextrose 10% infusion to maintain euglycemic hyperinsulinemia. Hemodynamic improvement occurred after 30 min, systolic blood pressure raised to 95 mmHg, and decongestion was achieved with intravenous furosemide. Insulin effect was dose-dependent and patient's hemodynamic status improved after insulin uptitration. Eight days later, the patient was weaned from the mechanical ventilation and she was successfully discharged after 14 days. High-dose intravenous infusion of insulin up to 10 units/kg per hour appears as an inotropic agent possibly through alterations in myocardial metabolism of fatty acids and augmentation of insulin secretion and uptake. This regimen possibly exhibits additional vasotropic properties. We conclude that euglycemic hyperinsulinemia is a potentially advantageous treatment in CCB toxicity.


Subject(s)
Amlodipine/toxicity , COVID-19 , Drug Overdose/drug therapy , Hyperinsulinism/chemically induced , Shock/drug therapy , Suicide, Attempted , Aged , COVID-19/psychology , Calcium Channel Blockers/toxicity , Drug Overdose/blood , Drug Overdose/diagnosis , Female , Humans , Hyperinsulinism/blood , Insulin/administration & dosage , Shock/blood , Shock/diagnosis , Suicide, Attempted/psychology
5.
PLoS One ; 16(9): e0256682, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1416872

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Glucocorticoid (GC)-exacerbated hyperglycemia is prevalent in hospitalized patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) but evidence-based insulin guidelines in inpatient settings are lacking. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Retrospective cohort study with capillary blood glucose (CBG) readings and insulin use, dosed with 50% basal (glargine)-50% bolus (lispro) insulin, analyzed in hospitalized patients with insulin-treated DM given GC and matched controls without GC (n = 131 pairs). GC group (median daily prednisone-equivalent dose: 53.36 mg (IQR 30.00, 80.04)) had greatest CBG differences compared to controls at dinner (254±69 vs. 184±63 mg/dL, P<0.001) and bedtime (260±72 vs. 182±55 mg/dL, P<0.001). In GC group, dinner CBG was 30% higher than lunch (254±69 vs. 199±77 mg/dL, P<0.001) when similar lispro to controls given at lunch. Bedtime CBG not different from dinner when 20% more lispro given at dinner (0.12 units/kg (IQR 0.08, 0.17) vs. 0.10 units/kg (0.06, 0.14), P<0.01). Despite receiving more lispro, bedtime hypoglycemic events were lower in GC group (0.0% vs. 5.9%, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Since equal bolus doses inadequately treat large dinner and bedtime GC-exacerbated glycemic excursions, initiating higher bolus insulin at lunch and dinner with additional enhanced GC-specific insulin supplemental scale may be needed as initial insulin doses in setting of high-dose GC.


Subject(s)
Blood Glucose/analysis , Diabetes Mellitus , Glucocorticoids/adverse effects , Hyperglycemia/chemically induced , Hypoglycemic Agents/adverse effects , Insulin , Aged , Chicago/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Humans , Insulin/administration & dosage , Insulin/blood , Male , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies
6.
J Endocrinol Invest ; 45(2): 445-452, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1392054

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: This study is aimed at evaluating changes in metrics of glucose control in home-isolated patients with type 1 diabetes and COVID-19 using a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system. METHODS: We included adults aged 18-45 years with type 1 diabetes, using CGM, followed by telemedicine at a Southern Italian University Hospital. Thirty-two home-quarantined subjects with SARS-CoV-2 positive swab constituted the COVID-19 group. Thirty age-matched diabetic individuals without COVID-19 formed the control group. The effects of COVID-19 on glycemic control in patients infected were assessed at different time points [2 weeks before-COVID-19 (Time 1), 2 weeks during-COVID-19 (Time 2) and 2 weeks after COVID-19 (Time 3)] and compared with those without infection. RESULTS: A significant reduction of TIR (Time 1 vs Time 2, %, 60.1 ± 16.6 vs 55.4 ± 19.2, P = 0.03), associated with a significant increase of TAR level 2 (10.1 ± 7.3 vs 16.7 ± 12.9, P < 0.001), GMI (7.1 ± 0.6 vs 7.5 ± 0.8, P < 0.001), CV (37.3 ± 7.1 vs 39.6 ± 7.0, P = 0.04), mean glucose values (mg/dL, 160.2 ± 26.5 vs 175.5 ± 32.6, P = 0.001) and standard deviation (59.2 ± 13.1 vs 68.6 ± 17.7, P = 0.001) was observed in patients with COVID-19. No significant change of glycemic metrics was found in the NO COVID-19 group across the time. CONCLUSION: Young home-isolated patients with type 1 diabetes and COVID-19 showed a worsening of glucose control during COVID-19, as compared with age-matched diabetic subjects without the infection.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/therapy , Glycemic Control , Quarantine , Adolescent , Adrenal Cortex Hormones/therapeutic use , Adult , Blood Glucose/drug effects , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/complications , Case-Control Studies , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/complications , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/drug effects , Glycated Hemoglobin A/metabolism , Humans , Insulin/administration & dosage , Insulin Infusion Systems , Italy , Male , Retrospective Studies , Telemedicine , Young Adult
7.
Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) ; 12: 703905, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1376692

ABSTRACT

Importance: There is no consensus on the impact of the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic lockdown on glycemic control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in the US. Aim: To determine the impact of the pandemic lockdown of March 15th through July 6th, 2020 on glycemic control after controlling for confounders. Subjects and Methods: An observational study of 110 subjects of mean age 14.8 ± 4.9 years(y), [male 15.4 ± 4.0y, (n=57); female 14.1 ± 3.8y, (n=53), p=0.07] with T1D of 6.31 ± 4.3y (95% CI 1.0-19.7y). Data were collected at 1-4 months before the lockdown and 1-4 months following the lifting of the lockdown at their first post-lockdown clinic visit. Results: There was no significant change in A1c between the pre- and post-pandemic lockdown periods, 0.18 ± 1.2%, (95% CI -0.05 to 0.41), p=0.13. There were equally no significant differences in A1c between the male and female subjects, -0.16 ± 1.2 vs -0.19 ± 1.2%, p=0.8; insulin pump users and non-pump users, -0.25 ± 1.0 vs -0.12 ± 1.4%, p=0.5; and pubertal vs prepubertal subjects, 0.18 ± 1.3 vs -0.11 ± 0.3%, p=0.6. The significant predictors of decrease in A1c were pre-lockdown A1c (p<0.0001) and the use of CGM (p=0.019). The CGM users had significant reductions in point-of-care A1c (0.4 ± 0.6%, p=0.0012), the CGM-estimated A1c (p=0.0076), mean glucose concentration (p=0.022), a significant increase in sensor usage (p=0.012), with no change in total daily dose of insulin (TDDI). The non-CGM users had significantly increased TDDI (p<0.0001) but no change in HbA1c, 0.06 ± 1.8%, p=0.86. Conclusions: There was no change in glycemic control during the pandemic lockdown of 2020 in US children.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Glycemic Control , Quarantine , Adolescent , Age Factors , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/instrumentation , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/methods , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/therapy , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/metabolism , Glycemic Control/instrumentation , Glycemic Control/methods , History, 21st Century , Humans , Insulin/administration & dosage , Insulin Infusion Systems , Male , Pandemics , Quarantine/organization & administration , Retrospective Studies , United States/epidemiology
8.
Diabetes Metab Syndr ; 15(5): 102244, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1356196

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We aim to provide a practical guidance on the use of intravenous insulin infusion for managing inpatient hyperglycemia. METHODS AND RESULTS: This document was formulated based on the review of available literature and personal experience of authors. We have used various case scenarios to illustrate variables which should be taken into account when deciding adjustments in infusion rate, including but not restricted to ambient blood glucose level and magnitude of blood glucose change in the previous hour. CONCLUSION: The guidance can be generalized to any situation where dedicated protocols are lacking, trained manpower is not available and resource constraints are present.


Subject(s)
Hospitalization , Hyperglycemia/drug therapy , Insulin/administration & dosage , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Glycemic Control/methods , Glycemic Control/standards , Humans , Hyperglycemia/blood , Infusions, Intravenous , Inpatients , Practice Guidelines as Topic
9.
Diabetes Metab Syndr ; 15(4): 102174, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1267653

ABSTRACT

AIMS: To study the feasibility of diabetes education through telemedicine in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) hospitalized for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) management. METHODS: This was a prospective study of 100 patients with DM who were admitted in a COVID isolation ward for management of COVID-19. Patients managed with multiple subcutaneous insulin injections were eligible. During teleconsultation, diabetes education including insulin injection technique was given by a diabetes educator via a phone call (audio and video) during hospitalization. They were also re-assessed after 2 weeks of discharge from the hospital via teleconsultation or in-person. RESULTS: Out of 100 patients, 72.0% had prior history of diabetes while 28.0% were newly diagnosed. The median age of our cohort was 56 years and median duration of diabetes was 7.0 years. Telemedicine as a mode of consult for diabetes education was accepted by 96.0% of patients during hospitalization. At 2 weeks' follow-up, 77.0% patients were following insulin instructions correctly and were satisfied with this mode of consultation. CONCLUSION: Diabetes education using telemedicine as a technology is feasible, acceptable, and effective in the management of most patients with DM. Telemedicine appears to be an effective way to replace routine visits in special situations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Insulin/administration & dosage , Remote Consultation/methods , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/pathology , Diabetes Mellitus/virology , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Female , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , India/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies
10.
J Clin Endocrinol Metab ; 106(10): e4007-e4016, 2021 09 27.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1261287

ABSTRACT

CONTEXT: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has created a need for remote blood glucose (BG) monitoring in the intensive care unit (ICU). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate feasibility and patient safety of a hybrid monitoring strategy of point-of-care (POC) BG plus continuous glucose monitor (CGM) in the ICU. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: ICU of an academic medical center. PATIENTS: Patients with COVID-19 on IV insulin. INTERVENTION: After meeting initial validation criteria, CGM was used for IV insulin titration and POC BG was performed every 6 hours or as needed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes included frequency of POC BG, workflow, safety, and accuracy measures. RESULTS: The study included 19 patients, 18 with CGM data, mean age 58 years, 89% on mechanical ventilation, 37% on vasopressors, and 42% on dialysis. The median time to CGM validation was 137 minutes (interquartile range [IQR] 114-206). During IV insulin, the median number of POC values was 7 (IQR 6-16) on day 1, and declined slightly thereafter (71% reduction compared with standard of 24/day). The median number of CGM values used nonadjunctively to titrate IV insulin was 11.5 (IQR 0, 15) on day 1 and increased thereafter. Time in range 70 to 180 mg/dL was 64 ± 23% on day 1 and 72 ± 16% on days 2 through 7, whereas time <70 mg/dL was 1.5 ± 4.1% on day 1 and <1% on days 2 through 7. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides data to support that CGM using a hybrid protocol is feasible, accurate, safe, and has potential to reduce nursing and staff workload.


Subject(s)
Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/methods , COVID-19/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/therapy , Insulin/administration & dosage , SARS-CoV-2 , Adult , Aged , Blood Glucose/analysis , COVID-19/therapy , Comorbidity , Critical Illness/therapy , Diabetes Complications/epidemiology , Diabetes Complications/therapy , Diabetes Complications/virology , Female , Glycemic Control/methods , Humans , Infusions, Intravenous , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Point-of-Care Systems , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome
11.
Expert Rev Endocrinol Metab ; 16(4): 181-189, 2021 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1233816

ABSTRACT

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the entire population with the most deleterious effects in elders. Elders, especially those with diabetes, are at the highest risk of COVID-19 related adverse outcomes and mortality. This is usually linked to the comorbidities that accumulate with age, diabetes-related chronic inflammation, and the pandemic's psychosocial effects.Areas covered: We present some approaches to manage these complicated elderly patients with diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the inpatient setting, we suggest similar (pre-pandemic) glycemic targets and emphasize the importance of using IV insulin and possible use of continuous glucose monitoring to reduce exposure and PPE utilization. Outside the hospital, we recommend optimal glycemic control within the limits imposed by considerations of safety. We also describe the advantages and challenges of using various technological platforms in clinical care.Expert opinion: The COVID-19 pandemic has lifted the veil off serious deficiencies in the infrastructures for care at both the individual level and the population level and also highlighted some of the strengths, all of which affect individuals with diabetes and COVID-19. We anticipate that things will not return to 'normal' after the COVID-19 pandemic has run its course, but rather they will be superseded by 'New Normal.'


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy , Inflammation/complications , Personal Protective Equipment/ethics , Administration, Intravenous , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Blood Glucose/analysis , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/methods , COVID-19/diagnosis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/mortality , Chronic Disease , Comorbidity , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Disease Management , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin/administration & dosage , Insulin/therapeutic use , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Personal Protective Equipment/standards , Prevalence , Risk Assessment , SARS-CoV-2/genetics , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Telemedicine/methods
12.
Am J Case Rep ; 22: e930733, 2021 Apr 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1206459

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND Intravenous (IV) dexamethasone is widely used in critical illness, chemotherapy, or severe COVID-19. Although glucocorticoid-induced hyperglycemia (GCIH) is well-known, there is no report describing the glycemic profile following a single dose of IV dexamethasone as captured on continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in a patient with diabetes treated with insulin. CASE REPORT A 70-year-old woman with diabetes and pancreatic adenocarcinoma was treated with chemotherapy containing dexamethasone every other week. CGM data of 23 cycles revealed a reproducible triphasic glycemic pattern consisting of a constant hyperglycemia period, followed by a transient improvement, and ending with another hyperglycemic plateau. Given this recurrent pattern, basal insulin and correction insulin were adjusted with subsequent GCIH attenuation. CONCLUSIONS This is the first report of CGM glycemic profile following recurring doses of IV dexamethasone in a patient with diabetes treated with basal-bolus insulin. The understanding of triphasic glycemic pattern allows optimal glycemic management.


Subject(s)
Adenocarcinoma/drug therapy , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/adverse effects , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/adverse effects , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Hyperglycemia/chemically induced , Insulin/adverse effects , Pancreatic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Administration, Intravenous , Aged , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/administration & dosage , Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use , Blood Glucose , COVID-19/drug therapy , Dexamethasone/adverse effects , Female , Glucocorticoids/administration & dosage , Glucocorticoids/therapeutic use , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/adverse effects , Insulin/administration & dosage , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Pancreatic Neoplasms/pathology , SARS-CoV-2
13.
J Med Internet Res ; 23(4): e24552, 2021 04 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1177923

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine use in chronic disease management has markedly increased during health emergencies due to COVID-19. Diabetes and technologies supporting diabetes care, including glucose monitoring devices, software analyzing glucose data, and insulin delivering systems, would facilitate remote and structured disease management. Indeed, most of the currently available technologies to store and transfer web-based data to be shared with health care providers. OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, we provided our patients the opportunity to manage their diabetes remotely by implementing technology. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of 2 virtual visits on glycemic control parameters among patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) during the lockdown period. METHODS: This prospective observational study included T1D patients who completed 2 virtual visits during the lockdown period. The glucose outcomes that reflected the benefits of the virtual consultation were time in range (TIR), time above range, time below range, mean daily glucose, glucose management indicator (GMI), and glycemic variability. This metric was generated using specific computer programs that automatically upload data from the devices used to monitor blood or interstitial glucose levels. If needed, we changed the ongoing treatment at the first virtual visit. RESULTS: Among 209 eligible patients with T1D, 166 completed 2 virtual visits, 35 failed to download glucose data, and 8 declined the visit. Among the patients not included in the study, we observed a significantly lower proportion of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) users (n=7/43, 16% vs n=155/166, 93.4% and n=9/43, 21% vs n=128/166, 77.1%, respectively; P<.001) compared to patients who completed the study. TIR significantly increased from the first (62%, SD 18%) to the second (65%, SD 16%) virtual visit (P=.02); this increase was more marked among patients using the traditional meter (n=11; baseline TIR=55%, SD 17% and follow-up TIR=66%, SD 13%; P=.01) than among those using CGM, and in those with a baseline GMI of ≥7.5% (n=46; baseline TIR=45%, SD 15% and follow-up TIR=53%, SD 18%; P<.001) than in those with a GMI of <7.5% (n=120; baseline TIR=68%, SD 15% and follow-up TIR=69%, SD 15%; P=.98). The only variable independently associated with TIR was the change of ongoing therapy. The unstandardized beta coefficient (B) and 95% CI were 5 (95% CI 0.7-8.0) (P=.02). The type of glucose monitoring device and insulin delivery systems did not influence glucometric parameters. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that the structured virtual visits help maintain and improve glycemic control in situations where in-person visits are not feasible.


Subject(s)
Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , COVID-19 , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , SARS-CoV-2 , Telemedicine , Adult , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Female , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Insulin/administration & dosage , Male , Pilot Projects , Prospective Studies
14.
Endocrinol Diabetes Metab ; 4(3): e00228, 2021 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1082636

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Severe COVID-19 has been anecdotally associated with high insulin requirements. It has been proposed that this may be driven by a direct diabetogenic effect of the virus that is unique to SARS-CoV-2, but evidence to support this is limited. To explore this, we compared insulin requirements in patients with severe COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 viral pneumonitis. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with severe COVID-19 admitted to our intensive care unit between March and June 2020. A historical control cohort of non-COVID-19 viral pneumonitis patients was identified from routinely collected audit data. Results: Insulin requirements were similar in patients with COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 viral pneumonitis after adjustment for pre-existing diabetes and severity of respiratory failure. Conclusions: In this single-centre study, we could not find evidence of a unique diabetogenic effect of COVID-19. We suggest that high insulin requirements in this disease relate to its propensity to cause severe respiratory failure in patients with pre-existing metabolic disease.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Insulin/administration & dosage , Respiratory Insufficiency/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Female , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin/therapeutic use , Male
15.
Diabetes Care ; 44(4): 1055-1058, 2021 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1076409

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The use of remote real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in the hospital has rapidly emerged to preserve personal protective equipment and reduce potential exposures during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We linked a hybrid CGM and point-of-care (POC) glucose testing protocol to a computerized decision support system for continuous insulin infusion and integrated a validation system for sensor glucose values into the electronic health record. We report our proof-of-concept experience in a COVID-19 intensive care unit. RESULTS: All nine patients required mechanical ventilation and corticosteroids. During the protocol, 75.7% of sensor values were within 20% of the reference POC glucose with an associated average reduction in POC of 63%. Mean time in range (70-180 mg/dL) was 71.4 ± 13.9%. Sensor accuracy was impacted by mechanical interferences in four patients. CONCLUSIONS: A hybrid protocol integrating real-time CGM and POC is helpful for managing critically ill patients with COVID-19 requiring insulin infusion.


Subject(s)
Blood Glucose/analysis , COVID-19 , Critical Illness/therapy , Diabetes Complications , Insulin Infusion Systems , Insulin/administration & dosage , Remote Sensing Technology , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Algorithms , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/instrumentation , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/methods , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/complications , COVID-19/drug therapy , Diabetes Complications/blood , Diabetes Complications/drug therapy , Equipment and Supplies , Female , Humans , Intensive Care Units , Male , Middle Aged , Point-of-Care Systems , Proof of Concept Study , Remote Sensing Technology/instrumentation , SARS-CoV-2
17.
JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr ; 45(1): 208-211, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1052910

ABSTRACT

Many patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) are acutely malnourished and often require aggressive and early nutrition support with parenteral nutrition (PN). However, PN-induced hyperglycemia is a predictor of hospital mortality and is associated with increased length of stay. Elevated blood glucose in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is also associated with increased mortality. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) is primarily used in the outpatient setting, but there is rapidly growing interest in its applicability to help treat dysglycemia in critically ill patients, especially during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We assessed the use of rtCGM data (Dexcom G6) in a 58-year-old male admitted to the ICU for severe COVID-19 infection, who developed PN-induced hyperglycemia with markedly elevated total daily insulin requirements as high as 128 units. rtCGM was used to safely titrate insulin infusion and monitor glucose levels. No episodes of hypoglycemia were observed, despite an extremely aggressive insulin regimen. This case demonstrates the potential utility of rtCGM in the critical care setting and highlights its potential to help conserve personal protective equipment and minimize unnecessary staff exposure in the setting of COVID-19.


Subject(s)
Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring/methods , Blood Glucose/metabolism , COVID-19/complications , Hyperglycemia/drug therapy , Insulin/administration & dosage , Parenteral Nutrition/adverse effects , Blood Glucose/analysis , COVID-19/diagnosis , Critical Illness/therapy , Humans , Hyperglycemia/blood , Hyperglycemia/diagnosis , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2
18.
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol ; 9(3): 174-188, 2021 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1052051

ABSTRACT

Hyperglycaemia in people with and without diabetes admitted to the hospital is associated with a substantial increase in morbidity, mortality, and health-care costs. Professional societies have recommended insulin therapy as the cornerstone of inpatient pharmacological management. Intravenous insulin therapy is the treatment of choice in the critical care setting. In non-intensive care settings, several insulin protocols have been proposed to manage patients with hyperglycaemia; however, meta-analyses comparing different treatment regimens have not clearly endorsed the benefits of any particular strategy. Clinical guidelines recommend stopping oral antidiabetes drugs during hospitalisation; however, in some countries continuation of oral antidiabetes drugs is commonplace in some patients with type 2 diabetes admitted to hospital, and findings from clinical trials have suggested that non-insulin drugs, alone or in combination with basal insulin, can be used to achieve appropriate glycaemic control in selected populations. Advances in diabetes technology are revolutionising day-to-day diabetes care and work is ongoing to implement these technologies (ie, continuous glucose monitoring, automated insulin delivery) for inpatient care. Additionally, transformations in care have occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, including the use of remote inpatient diabetes management-research is needed to assess the effects of such adaptations.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy , Disease Management , Hospitalization/trends , Hyperglycemia/therapy , Blood Glucose/drug effects , Blood Glucose/metabolism , COVID-19/blood , COVID-19/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Humans , Hyperglycemia/blood , Hyperglycemia/epidemiology , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Insulin/administration & dosage
19.
Diabetes Technol Ther ; 23(6): 467-470, 2021 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1029729

ABSTRACT

Insulin pump training has traditionally been performed in-person. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic necessitated vast increases in the number of virtual pump trainings for Tandem t:slim X2 insulin pump starts. A customized structured pump training curriculum specifically tailored to virtual learning was deployed in early 2020, and included (1) preparation for training with use of the t:simulator app, (2) use of the teach-back method during video training, and (3) automating data uploads for follow-up. Retrospective analysis from >23,000 pump training sessions performed from January 1, 2020 to July 28, 2020 showed sensor time-in-range for up to 6 months after training was 72% (60%-81%) for virtual training versus 67% (54%-78%) for in-person training. Higher user satisfaction (4.78 ± 0.52 vs. 4.64 ± 0.68; P < 0.01) and higher user confidence (4.61 ± 0.75 vs. 4.47 ± 0.0.85; P < 0.01) were reported after the virtual sessions. Virtual pump training was well received and proved safe and effective with the new virtual training curriculum.


Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy , Hypoglycemia/epidemiology , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Insulin Infusion Systems , Insulin/administration & dosage , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Telemedicine/methods , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , COVID-19 , Child , Curriculum , Diabetes Mellitus/metabolism , Educational Measurement , Feasibility Studies , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin A/metabolism , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Infusion Pumps, Implantable , Insulin/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2 , Young Adult
20.
Therapie ; 75(4): 327-333, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1005621

ABSTRACT

According to previous reports, diabetes seems to be a risk factor which worsens the serious clinical events caused by COVID-19. But is diabetes per se a risk factor that increases the probability of getting the virus? This paper will discuss this point. There are not many research data on antidiabetic drugs in this context. The potential influence of glucose-lowering agents on the severity of COVID-19 has not been described yet. Dipeptidylpeptidase-4 (DPP-4) is a cell surface protein ubiquitously expressed in many tissues and it is also a soluble molecule found in serum/plasma fluids. DPP-4 is involved in infection of cells by some viruses. This paper reviews data about the use of DPP-4 inhibitors and others diabetes drugs on COVID-19 patients. As such, no available evidence has yet suggested that glucose-lowering drugs - including those targeting DPP4-related pathways - produce any significant harm or benefit in the context of human infections. However, insulin must remain the first-choice agent in the management of critically ill-hospitalized patients, while it is recommended to suspend other agents in unstable patients. This paper provides related French and international recommendations for people with diabetes who got infected by COVID-19 and upholds that infections may alter glucose control and may require additional vigilance.


Subject(s)
Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Hypoglycemic Agents/administration & dosage , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Animals , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/physiopathology , Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy , Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors/adverse effects , Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors/pharmacology , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/adverse effects , Hypoglycemic Agents/pharmacology , Insulin/administration & dosage , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral/physiopathology , Risk Factors , Severity of Illness Index
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL