1. Day and Night Closed-Loop Control in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes
- Author
-
Eric Renard, Federico Di Palma, Sabine Arnolds, Giordano Lanzola, Roman Hovorka, Jerome Place, Malgorzata E. Wilinska, Rachele Scotton, Simone Del Favero, Anne Farret, Marianna Nodale, Kavita Kumareswaran, Julia K. Mader, Alessio Filippi, Angelo Avogaro, Paola Soru, Mark L. Evans, Daniela Elleri, M. Ellmerer, Chiara Toffanin, Yoeri M. Luijf, Claudio Cobelli, Karen Caldwell, Werner Doll, Daniela Bruttomesso, Janet M. Allen, Lutz Heinemann, Chiara Dalla Man, Lalantha Leelarathna, Carsten Benesch, J. Hans DeVries, Koos H. Zwinderman, Lalo Magni, and Giuseppe De Nicolao
- Subjects
Advanced and Specialized Nursing ,Type 1 diabetes ,business.industry ,Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism ,030209 endocrinology & metabolism ,Hypoglycemia ,medicine.disease ,Target range ,Artificial pancreas ,Subcutaneous insulin ,03 medical and health sciences ,0302 clinical medicine ,Diabetes mellitus ,Internal Medicine ,medicine ,030212 general & internal medicine ,business ,Algorithm ,Closed loop ,Glycemic - Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare two validated closed-loop (CL) algorithms versus patient self-control with CSII in terms of glycemic control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This study was a multicenter, randomized, three-way crossover, open-label trial in 48 patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus for at least 6 months, treated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. Blood glucose was controlled for 23 h by the algorithm of the Universities of Pavia and Padova with a Safety Supervision Module developed at the Universities of Virginia and California at Santa Barbara (international artificial pancreas [iAP]), by the algorithm of University of Cambridge (CAM), or by patients themselves in open loop (OL) during three hospital admissions including meals and exercise. The main analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. Main outcome measures included time spent in target (glucose levels between 3.9 and 8.0 mmol/L or between 3.9 and 10.0 mmol/L after meals). RESULTS Time spent in the target range was similar in CL and OL: 62.6% for OL, 59.2% for iAP, and 58.3% for CAM. While mean glucose level was significantly lower in OL (7.19, 8.15, and 8.26 mmol/L, respectively) (overall P = 0.001), percentage of time spent in hypoglycemia ( CONCLUSIONS Both CAM and iAP algorithms provide safe glycemic control.
- Published
- 2013