Use of the Continuous Glucose Monitoring System to guide therapy in patients with insulin-treated diabetes: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To show improved glycemic control in patients with insulin-treated diabetes after adjustments to the diabetes management plan based on either continuous glucose monitoring using the Continuous Glucose Monitoring System (CGMS) or frequent self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) using a home blood glucose meter. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January to September 2000, patients aged 19 to 76 years with insulin-treated diabetes were assigned to insulin therapy adjustments based on either CGMS or SMBG values. At the end of the study, patients in both groups used the CGMS for 3 days; these values were used to calculate measures of hypoglycemia. Repeated-measures analysis of variance with post hoc comparisons were used to test differences in hemoglobin A1c levels and hypoglycemia between the 2 study groups. RESULTS: A total of 128 patients were enrolled in the study. Nineteen discontinued study participation, leaving 51 in the CGMS group and 58 in the SMBG group. No significant differences were noted in demographics or baseline characteristics between the 2 groups. There were no significant differences in hemoglobin A1c levels between the CGMS group and the SMBG group at baseline (9.1% +/- 1.1% vs 9.0% +/- 1.0%, P = .70), and both groups showed statistically significant (P < .001) and similar (P = .95) improvement in hemoglobin A1c levels after 12 weeks of study. However, the CGMS group had a significantly shorter duration of hypoglycemia (sensor glucose, < or = 60 mg/dL) at week 12 of the study (49.4 +/- 40.8 vs 81.0 +/- 61.1 minutes per event, P = .009). CONCLUSION: Use of the CGMS to guide therapy adjustments in patients with insulin-treated diabetes reduces the duration of hypoglycemia compared with therapy adjustments guided by SMBG values alone.

Impact of the new National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) guidelines on patient management.

PURPOSE: To update nurse practitioners (NPs) on the latest National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) guidelines for the management of high blood cholesterol in adults. DATA SOURCES: The 2001 NCEP Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III guidelines and supporting scientific reviews and reports of clinical trials related to the evidence upon which the guidelines are based. CONCLUSIONS: The many new features of the ATP III guidelines include an increased emphasis on the patient with multiple risk factors in order to identify appropriate candidates for primary prevention and on more stringent classifications of elevated lipid/lipoprotein levels. However, elevated levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol continue to be the focus for both primary and secondary prevention, and 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors (statins) are clearly the drugs of choice for decreasing LDL cholesterol in most patients. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Because NPs play key roles in optimizing treatment management, it is important that they become familiar with, and be prepared to help implement, these latest guidelines. By embracing the global risk assessment approach of ATP III and aggressively treating all at-risk patients, NPs can take a proactive role in helping to halt the progression of coronary heart disease and its consequences.

Glycohemoglobin assessment program: glycated hemoglobin and epidemiologic variables in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To obtain data on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels and a variety of epidemiologic variables in patients with type 2 diabetes living in the western United States. METHODS: This study was a noncomparative, multicenter, epidemiologic survey. Data were collected from consecutively enrolled patients at nine separate primary-care sites. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had type 2 diabetes, were between 35 and 70 years old, and had received oral antidiabetic therapy, insulin, or both for at least 3 months before enrollment. RESULTS: Of 602 patients enrolled in the study, 588 were included in the final univariate analyses. The overall mean HbA1c level was 8.2%; however, only 20.4% of patients achieved the American Diabetes Association (ADA) strict HbA1c target of <7.0%. On the other extreme, only 18.9% of patients had HbA1c levels of greater than or equal to 9.5%. Patients treated with insulin had the highest HbA1c levels. Combination therapies were used in 59% of patients, and only 12% were treated with insulin alone. CONCLUSION: The mean HbA1c level in this study is lower than in prior surveys. The use of combination therapy for the management of type 2 diabetes has increased, and the use of insulin as monotherapy has decreased. Although more patients need to reach the ADA HbA1c target of <7.0%, extremely high HbA1c levels are less common than they were in the past. This finding suggests that HbA1c levels are declining, although many patients still have values above 7.0%.

Treating diabetes: cardiovascular benefits of antidiabetes drugs.

Type 2 diabetes is a metabolic disorder that, if untreated, can result in macrovascular and microvascular complications. Lowering blood glucose levels primarily reduces microvascular risk; other treatment strategies are necessary to lower the risk for macrovascular disease. Because most patients with diabetes die of macrovascular disease, it is vitally important that patients with diabetes receive aggressive therapies to lessen this risk. It has been found that the risk for macrovascular complications begins even earlier than the risk for microvascular complications. Therefore, patients with insulin resistance (now called prediabetes) should be identified and treated to lower their risk of cardiovascular disease and reduce their risk for progression to diabetes. Two cases are reviewed--a patient with prediabetes and the metabolic syndrome, and a second patient with type 2 diabetes and advanced cardiovascular disease. A review of potential cardiovascular therapies is included.

Considerations for treating dyslipidemia in special diabetic populations.

This is a review of the problem of dyslipidemia and cardiovascular disease (CVD) in special diabetic populations. Clearly all patients with diabetes are at increased risk for CVD compared to non-diabetic populations. But within the subset that is patients with diabetes there are individuals who are particularly vulnerable. These groups include women, who are often overlooked and undertreated for their cardiovascular risk. Additionally, it includes those with fewer resources, many from minority populations, who are at very high risk for poor preventive care and serious cardiovascular morbidity. This review details the risk for CVD in a variety of different diabetic high-risk groups. It then discusses treatment options and approaches that should be employed in these populations.

The metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease: understanding the role of insulin resistance.

The most common and clinically important complication in adults with diabetes is cardiovascular disease (CVD), which includes coronary heart disease, peripheral vascular disease, and stroke. Both type 2 diabetes and the insulin resistance syndrome are associated with a marked increase in the risk for CVD. The metabolic syndrome and the closely related insulin resistance syndrome have recently been recognized as important disorders, each being associated with an increase in CVD risk even in the absence of glucose intolerance. Given the significant public health burden of CVD, risk reduction has emerged as a significant clinical challenge for most practitioners. Diabetes and the insulin resistance syndrome are closely related disorders, with insulin resistance being more than a key pathogenic defect in type 2 diabetes. Even in the absence of glucose intolerance, these 2 disorders are both associated with a number of distinct pathologic findings, including hypertension, atherogenic dyslipidemia, a prothrombotic environment, and significant vascular and hemodynamic abnormalities that result from endothelial cell dysfunction. Insulin resistance is now recognized to be closely associated with the development of each of these risk factors. This article uses a case-based approach to discuss the unique features of insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes considered to be key contributors to CVD risk. A systematic approach to both evaluation and management is proposed, with priority given to therapies of demonstrated clinical benefit. Because of its critical and central role in the development of many CVD risk factors, targeted treatment of insulin resistance will also be discussed as such therapy may prove to be a critical component of care in years to come.