Device-Related Skin Reactions Increase Emotional Burden in Youths With Type 1 Diabetes and Their Parents.

BACKGROUND: Skin reactions due to technological devices pose a significant concern in the management of type 1 diabetes (T1D). This multicentric, comparative cross-sectional study aimed to assess the psychological impact of device-related skin issues on youths with T1D and their parents. METHODS: Participants with skin reactions were matched in a 1:1 ratio with a control group. Diabetes-related emotional distress was evaluated using the Problem Areas in Diabetes-Teen version (PAID-T) for participants aged 11 to 19 years and the Problem Areas in Diabetes-Parent Revised version (PAID-PR) completed by parents. In addition, glucose control was assessed through glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) values and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics. RESULTS: A total of 102 children and adolescents were consecutively recruited. Adolescents with skin issues had higher PAID-T scores compared to those without (79.6 ± 21.1 vs 62 ± 16.8; P = .004). Parents of youths with skin reactions also reported higher PAID-PR scores than the control group (34.0 ± 11.0 vs 26.9 ± 12.3; P = .015). No differences were observed in HbA1c levels (6.9 ± 0.8% vs 6.8 ± 0.8%, P = .555) or CGM glucose metrics between the two groups. Remarkably, 25.5% were forced to discontinue insulin pumps and/or glucose sensors (21.5% and 5.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlighted the increased emotional burden experienced by youths with T1D and their parents due to device-related skin reactions, emphasizing the need for further research and interventions in this crucial aspect of diabetes management.

Sustained Effectiveness of an Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System in a Cohort of Children and Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: A 1-Year Real-World Study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate glucose metrics and identify potential predictors of the achievement of glycemic outcomes in children and adolescents during their first 12 months of MiniMed 780G use. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This multicenter, longitudinal, real-world study recruited 368 children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D) starting SmartGuard technology between June 2020 and June 2022. Ambulatory glucose profile data were collected during a 15-day run-in period (baseline), 2 weeks after automatic mode activation, and every 3 months. The influence of covariates on glycemic outcomes after 1 year of MiniMed 780G use was assessed. RESULTS: After 15 days of automatic mode use, all glucose metrics improved compared with baseline (P < 0.001), except for time below range (P = 0.113) and coefficient of variation (P = 0.330). After 1 year, time in range (TIR) remained significantly higher than at baseline (75.3% vs. 62.8%, P < 0.001). The mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) over the study duration was lower than the previous year (6.9 ± 0.6% vs. 7.4 ± 0.9%, P < 0.001). Time spent in tight range (70-140 mg/dL) was 51.1%, and the glycemia risk index was 27.6. Higher TIR levels were associated with a reduced number of automatic correction boluses (P < 0.001), fewer SmartGuard exits (P = 0.021), and longer time in automatic mode (P = 0.030). Individuals with baseline HbA1c >8% showed more relevant improvement in TIR levels (from 54.3% to 72.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the sustained effectiveness of MiniMed 780G among youth with T1D. Findings suggest that even children and adolescents with low therapeutic engagement may benefit from SmartGuard technology.

First International Survey on Diabetes Providers' Assessment of Skin Reactions in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes Using Technological Devices.

BACKGROUND: Advances in diabetes technological devices led to optimization of diabetes care; however, long-lasting skin exposure to devices may be accompanied by an increasing occurrence of cutaneous reactions. METHODS: We used an open-link web-based survey to evaluate diabetes-care providers' viewpoint on prevalence, management practices, and knowledge related to skin reactions with the use of diabetes technological devices. A post hoc analysis was applied to investigate differences in the level of awareness on this topic in relation to the experience in diabetes technology. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five responses from 39 different countries were collected. Most respondents (69%) routinely examine patients' skin at each visit. All the preventive measures are not clear and, mainly, homogenously put into clinical practice. Contact dermatitis was the most frequently reported cutaneous complication due to diabetes devices, and its most common provocative causes are not yet fully known by diabetes-care providers. Almost half of the respondents (42%) had discussed the presence of harmful allergens contained in adhesives with device manufacturers. There is general agreement on the need to strengthen knowledge on dermatological complications. CONCLUSIONS: Although diabetes-care providers are quite aware of the chance to develop skin reactions in people with diabetes using technological devices, there are still some unmet needs. Large follow-up studies and further dissemination tools are awaited to address the gaps revealed by our survey.

MiniMed 780G Six-Month Use in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes: Clinical Targets and Predictors of Optimal Glucose Control.

Background: The aim of this multicenter observational real-world study was to investigate glycemic outcomes in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes over the first 6-month use of MiniMed™ 780G. The secondary objective was to evaluate demographic and clinical factors that may be significantly associated with the achievement of therapeutic goals. Methods: Demographic, anamnestic, and clinical data of study participants were collected at the time of enrollment. Data on ambulatory glucose profile were acquired at 3 and 6 months after activating automatic mode. Aggregated glucose metrics and device settings of the entire study period were analyzed to identify predictors of optimal glycemic control, assessed by the concomitant achievement of time in range (TIR) >70%, coefficient of variation (CV) <36%, glucose management indicator (GMI) <7%, and time below range (TBR) <4%. Results: Our study cohort consisted of 111 children and adolescents (54.1% female) aged 7-18 years. All the most relevant clinical targets were achieved according to recommendations from the International Consensus both at 3 and 6 months. When considering aggregated data, primary goals in terms of TIR, CV, GMI, and TBR were achieved, respectively, by 72.1%, 74.8%, 68.5%, and 74.8% of participants. In addition, 44 individuals (39.6%) concomitantly addressed all the above clinical targets. Regression analysis revealed that older age, briefer duration of disease, and shorter active insulin time were significant predictors of optimal glucose control. Comparing two groups of individuals stratified according to the glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) mean value in the year preceding MiniMed 780G use, achieving glycemic targets was observed in the subgroup with lower HbA1c. Conclusions: Our study highlights the effectiveness and safety of MiniMed 780G in the pediatric population. More extensive and personalized training on advanced hybrid closed-loop use should be considered for younger people and those with long disease duration.

A systematic review of the prevalence, risk factors and screening tools for autonomic and diabetic peripheral neuropathy in children, adolescents and young adults with type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: We aimed to estimate the prevalence of Diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) and Cardiac autonomic neuropathy (CAN) in youth with type 1 diabetes; identify key risk factors; identify the most useful tests for the diagnostic evaluation of DPN and CAN; identify key treatment options for DPN and CAN. METHODS: A systematic search was performed including studies published in the last 15 years. PICO framework was used in the selection process and evidence was assessed using the GRADE system. RESULTS: A total of 758 studies were identified and a final number of 49 studies were included in this systematic review. According to moderate-high level quality studies, the prevalence of probable DPN, ranged between 13.5 and 62%; subclinical DPN between 22 and 88%; confirmed DPN between 2.6 and 11%. The Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument was the tool with higher sensitivity and specificity for detecting DPN, which needs to be confirmed by nerve conduction velocity. The prevalence of CAN was 4-39%. Specific treatment options for DPN or CAN in patients younger than 25 years are not available. Key risk factors for DPN and CAN are hyperglycemia/HbA1c, age, diabetes duration, the presence of other microvascular complications, waist/height ratio, lipid profile and blood pressure. For CAN, additional risk factors were cigarette smoking, BMI and total daily insulin. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of neuropathy in youth with type 1 diabetes varies depending on different screening methods and characteristics of the study populations. However, the assessed studies confirmed a relatively high prevalence of subclinical neuropathy, reiterating the importance of early identification of risk factors to prevent this complication.

Uric acid and cardiometabolic risk by gender in youth with type 1 diabetes.

The aim of this study was to investigate the association between uric acid (UA) and cardiometabolic risk factors (CMRFs) by sex in youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Retrospective data collected from 1323 children and adolescents (5-18 years; 716 boys) with T1D recruited in 9 Italian Pediatric Diabetes Centers were analyzed. CMRFs included UA, HbA1c, blood pressure (BP), cholesterol (TC), HDL, triglycerides (TG), neutrophils (N) and lymphocytes (L) count, glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (calculated using Schwartz-Lyon equation). In boys, we found a higher age, daily insulin dose, TG, TG/HDL ratio, TC/HDL ratio, systolic BP, N/L ratio and lower HDL, and eGFR across UA tertiles (p = 0.01-0.0001). Similar results were found in girls but not for TG and systolic BP. In boys, the odds ratio (OR) of high levels of TG/HDL ratio, TC/HDL ratio, BP and mildly reduced eGFR (MRGFR) increased for 0.5 mg/dL of UA. Instead, in girls an increased levels of 0.5 mg/dL of UA were associated with high OR of TC/HDL ratio, N/L ratio and MRGFR. Uric acid may represent a useful marker for identifying youth with T1D at high cardiometabolic risk, and this association appears to vary by sex.