Beneficial effect of lisinopril plus telmisartan in patients with type 2 diabetes, microalbuminuria and hypertension.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors have favourable effects on hypertension and diabetic nephropathy, but persistent use may result in incomplete blockade of the renin-angiotensin system. Long-term effects of dual blockade using the ACE inhibitor lisinopril and the long-acting angiotensin II receptor blocker (ARB) telmisartan on blood pressure and albumin excretion rate (AER) were evaluated. Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension (systolic blood pressure [SBP] >or=140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure [DBP] >or=90 mmHg) and microalbuminuria (AER 30-300 mg/24h) received 20mg of lisinopril or 80 mg of telmisartan once a day for 24 weeks. Patients were then randomised to continuing treatment with the respective monotherapy or with lisinopril plus telmisartan for a further 28 weeks. Significant (P<0.001) declines in SBP (11.1 mmHg versus 10.0 mmHg), DBP (5.6 mmHg versus 5.3 mmHg) and AER (98 mg/24 h versus 80 mg/24 h) were achieved with lisinopril (n=95) or telmisartan (n=97), respectively, after 24 weeks. Subsequent treatment with lisinopril plus telmisartan for 28 weeks resulted in further significant reductions (P<0.001) in SBP, DBP and AER compared with either monotherapy. All treatments were well tolerated. Lisinopril plus telmisartan thus provides superior blood pressure and AER control than either monotherapy. We conclude that use of dual blockade may provide a new approach to prevention of diabetic nephropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes, hypertension and microalbuminuria.

Comparison of lunch and bedtime NPH insulin plus mealtime insulin Lispro therapy with premeal regular insulin plus bedtime NPH insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes.

AIM: Nonfasting plasma glucose is claimed to be a better marker of diabetic control than fasting plasma glucose in type 2 diabetes. In this study we compared the efficacy and safety profile of two different intensive insulin treatment strategies in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes despite using a twice-daily insulin regimen. METHODS: We studied 60 insulin-treated patients who had uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. The study was a 6-month, open-label, randomised, parallel clinical trial conducted in two diabetes centres. The main end-points for analysis were weekly self-monitored blood glucose readings, HbA1c levels, total daily insulin dose, weight gain and the number of hypoglycaemic episodes. RESULTS: The breakfast 2-h, lunch 2-h and dinner 2-h postprandial glucose values and pre-dinner glucose values were significantly lower in the Lispro group than the regular insulin group. The HbA1c value at the end of the study was significantly lower in the Lispro group (7.3 +/- 0.7%) compared with the regular insulin group (7.7 +/- 0.7%; P<0.05). Mean insulin doses were similar in the treatment groups initially and at the end. There was a statistically significant increase in insulin dose in both groups from baseline to the end of the study (P<0.05). Overall hypoglycaemia rates were comparably low and similar in both groups during the study. CONCLUSIONS: We have shown that mealtime insulin Lispro plus additional lunch and bedtime NPH insulin is superior to premeal regular insulin plus bedtime NPH insulin for overall glycaemic regulation with similar weight gain and comparable rates of hypoglycaemia.

Diabetes education: a chance to improve well-being of Turkish people with type 2 diabetes.

To examine the influence of diabetes education on well-being, 255 patients with type 2 diabetes were recruited according to whether they attended a diabetes education program (n=126) or not (n=129). In patients who had participated in the program, the mean anxiety score was significantly lower, whereas positive well-being and general well-being scores were significantly higher than for patients who had not participated. Factors related to lower well-being included: being female, taking insulin, not attending a diabetes education program and having HbA(1c) level greater than 8%. The odds of having better well-being were two-fold higher in patients participating the diabetes education program compared with those who had not. Diabetes education has a crucial role in improving the well-being of patients with type 2 diabetes. All patients with diabetes should be encouraged to attend a diabetes education program.