[The efficacy of outpatient monitoring of children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes with regular use of professional continuous glucose monitoring].

BACKGROUND: According to research, only 38% of patients reach glycated hemoglobin targets. It is possible to improve the effectiveness of medical care for children with T1D using modern technologies, including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). AIMS: To evaluate the effectiveness of outpatient monitoring of children and adolescents with T1D with regular use of professional continuous glucose monitoring. METHODS: The inclusion criteria: age 8−12 years; T1D at least 1 year; insulin therapy by multiple injections of insulin; inadequate glycemic control of T1D: НbА1с level of 7.5% and higher and / or children and adolescents with frequent episodes of hypoglycemia (usually 4 times a week) or with a history of severe hypoglycemia; signed informed consent. All patients initially and 12 weeks after inclusion in the study conducted a study of the level of НbА1с, and also performed CGM for 6 days. Based on the results of CGM, glycemia indicators and daily doses of insulin were recorded, treatment was evaluated and corrected, and recommendations for self-monitoring were made. Glucose monitoring was carried 120−144 hours using the blind method iPro2 (Medtronic, USA). RESULTS: In all, 99 children aged 8−18 years were included in the study in all centers. The decrease in the level of НbА1с by the end of the study was 0.72%, while the proportion of patients who reached the target level of НbА1с (defined as <7.5%) was statistically significantly higher at the end of the study (15.5% and 2%, respectively; p<0.05). During the study, patients showed a trend towards a decrease in the average level and variability of glycemia by the end of the study, however, statistical significance was achieved only in relation to the average level of glycemia (p=0.04). Conducted insulin therapy, determined by the average daily doses of long-acting and short-acting insulin, did not statistically significantly change at the end of the study. The frequency of DKA episodes and severe hypoglycemia did not statistically significantly differ from the initial level. CONCLUSIONS: For children with poor glycemic control of T1D, the use of professional CGM is effective in terms of glycemic control and a safe method.

[Remote monitoring and treatment of children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes].

RATIONALE: Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) is an effective method for optimizing glycemic control in children with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM1). However, the use of CSII does not always result in adequate glycemic control. Telehealth can be applied as one of the methods to improve the effectiveness of treatment. AIMS: To evaluate the use of remote medical support of children and adolescents with DM1 and its influence on glycemic control, quality of life, and incidence of acute complications of DM1. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a 24-week multi-institutional prospective open-label controlled clinical trial. 180 children and adolescents were included in this study and divided into the following categories: 1) age 8-18 years; 2) DM1 at least 1 year; 3) pump insulin therapy Medtronic Paradigm (Medtronic MiniMed, USA) at least 6 months; 4) self-monitoring of glycemia at least 4 times a day and replacement of the insulin pump infusion system at least once every 3 days; 5) inadequate glycemic control of DM1: the level of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 7.5% or higher. Patients were assigned to a remote consultation group (RC; n=100) or a traditional control group (TC; n=80). All patients were trained on the basic principles of DM1 and CSII, and we measured initial HbA1c, then after 12 and 24 weeks, also registered and analyzed glycemic indicators and daily doses of insulin, evaluated and corrected the treatment. Patients or their parents in the RC group sent pump data via the Internet to the pump insulin therapy center at least once every 2 weeks at home and received treatment recommendations in response. RESULTS: The total number of patients included in the study in all institutions was 180 children at 8-18 years. Patients in both groups did not differ in age, gender, duration of DM1 and CSII, and HbA1c level. The total amount of remote consultations for all institutions was 949. The decrease in the level of HbA1c by the end of the study against the initial one was statistically significantly greater in the RC group: 1.17% compared to 0.59% in the TC group (p<0.05). The proportion of patients who reached the target level of HbA1c (<7.5%) was significantly higher in the RC group (32%) compared to the TC group (12.5%, p<0.05). During the study, the incidence of DKA and severe hypoglycemia in the RC group was statistically significantly lower. CONCLUSIONS: Remote monitoring in children with DM1 resulted in significant improvements in glycemic control (HbA1c, glycemic variability, and hypoglycemic frequency). The accumulation of evidence on the effectiveness and safety of telehealth in DM should contribute to implementing this approach in practical health care.

A glucokinase gene mutation in a young boy with diabetes mellitus, hyperinsulinemia, and insulin resistance.

We report the case of a 12-year-old boy with a glucokinase (GCK) mutation, and diabetes with hyperinsulinemia and insulin resistance. For 4 years, the patient intermittently received insulin medications Actrapid HM and Protaphane HM (total dose 5 U/day), with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels of 6.6%-7.0%. After extensive screening the patient was found to carry a heterozygous mutation (p.E256K) in GCK (MIM #138079, reference sequence NM_000162.3). Insulin therapy was replaced by metformin at 1,700 mg/day. One year later, his HbA1c level was 6.9%, postprandial glycemia at 120 min of oral glucose tolerance test was 15.4 mmol/L, hyperinsulinemia had increased to 508.9 mU/L, homeostasis model assessment index was 114.2 and the Matsuda index was 0.15. Insulin resistance was confirmed by a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp test - M-index was 2.85 mg/kg/min. This observation is a rare case of one of the clinical variants of diabetes, which should be taken into account by a vigilant endocrinologist due to the need for nonstandard diagnostic and therapeutic approaches.