Perinatal outcomes in type 2 diabetes.

Over the past decade the prevalence of type 2 diabetes in pregnancy has continued to increase. It is vital that health care professionals recognize that preconception care is just as important for mothers with type 2 diabetes as it is in type 1 diabetes. All women with type 2 diabetes should be advised regarding safe effective contraception and the benefits of optimal glycemic control, folic acid supplementation, and avoidance of potentially harmful mediations before attempting pregnancy. Glycemic control is the most important modifiable risk factor for congenital anomaly in women with type 2 diabetes, whereas maternal obesity and social disadvantage are associated with large for gestational age neonates. This review aims to bring the reader up to date with the burden of perinatal outcomes and clinical interventions to improve maternal and infant health. It warns that the consequences of type 2 diabetes pregnancy do not end at birth.

Role of continuous glucose monitoring in the management of diabetic pregnancy.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) with intermittent capillary glucose fingerstick tests is currently the universally accepted method of glucose monitoring in pregnancy. During pregnancy SMBG tests are recommended before and after meals and before bed (typically 7 values/d). Continuous glucose monitoring systems consist of a disposable subcutaneous glucose-sensing device, electrochemically measuring glucose levels in subcutaneous tissues every 10 seconds, providing an average interstitial glucose value every 5 minutes (typically 288 values/d). From a research perspective this provides unprecedented insights into the pathophysiology of glucose metabolism, while from a clinical perspective it can facilitate enhanced patient-professional decision making, patient motivation, and improved glycaemic control. CGM has thus been described as a "roadmap for effective self-management" and as a "stepping stone in the journey towards a cure." This review will consider the lessons learned and evidence supporting current and potential future use of CGM in the management of diabetes in pregnancy.

Following in Banting's footsteps or straying from the path? Observations from contemporary diabetes innovation.

While advancements in the treatment of diabetes continue to rapidly evolve, many of the newer technologies have financial barriers to care, opposing the egalitarian ethos of Banting who sold his patent on insulin for a nominal cost to allow it to be made widely available. Inequity in access to new therapies drives disparity in diabetes burden with potential for these gaps to widen in the future. The 2023 International Conference on Advanced Technologies and Treatments of Diabetes (ATTD) presented ground-breaking and current research in diabetes technology. Oral presentations of the ATTD conference 2023 were analyzed to describe what percentage of speakers discussed equity in their talks. Overall, less than a quarter of presenters discussed equity, though there was regional variation. To ensure that diabetes technologies reduce disparity and improve outcomes, we encourage future speakers at diabetes (technology) conferences to consider equity of diabetes care and incorporate this into their presentations.

Improved technology satisfaction and sleep quality with Medtronic MiniMed® Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop delivery compared to predictive low glucose suspend in people with Type 1 Diabetes in a randomized crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Automated insulin delivery aims to lower treatment burden and improve quality of life as well as glycemic outcomes. METHODS: We present sub-study data from a dual-center, randomized, open-label, two-sequence crossover study in automated insulin delivery naïve users, comparing Medtronic MiniMed® Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop (AHCL) to Sensor Augmented Pump therapy with Predictive Low Glucose Management (SAP + PLGM). At the end of each 4-week intervention, impacts on quality of life, sleep and treatment satisfaction were compared using seven age-appropriate validated questionnaires given to patients or caregivers. RESULTS: 59/60 people completed the study (mean age 23.3 ± 14.4yrs). Statistically significant differences favoring AHCL were demonstrated in several scales (data shown as mean ± SE). In adults (≥ 18yrs), technology satisfaction favored AHCL over PLGM as shown by a higher score in the DTSQs during AHCL (n = 28) vs SAP + PLGM (n = 29) (30.9 ± 0.7 vs 27.9 ± 0.7, p = 0.004) and DTSQc AHCL (n = 29) vs SAP + PLGM (n = 30) (11.7 ± 0.9 vs 9.2 ± 0.8, p = 0.032). Adolescents (aged 13-17yrs) also showed a higher DTSQc score during AHCL (n = 16) versus SAP + PLGM (n = 15) (14.8 ± 0.7 vs 12.1 ± 0.8, p = 0.024). The DTQ "change" score (n = 59) favored AHCL over SAP + PLGM (3.5 ± 0.0 vs 3.3 ± 0.0, p < 0.001). PSQI was completed in those > 16 years (n = 36) and demonstrated improved sleep quality during AHCL vs SAP + PLGM (4.8 ± 0.3 vs 5.7 ± 0.3, p = 0.048) with a total score > 5 indicating poor quality sleep. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that AHCL compared to SAP + PLGM mode has the potential to increase treatment satisfaction and improve subjective sleep quality in adolescents and adults with T1D.

Improved Glycemic Outcomes With Medtronic MiniMed Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop Delivery: Results From a Randomized Crossover Trial Comparing Automated Insulin Delivery With Predictive Low Glucose Suspend in People With Type 1 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To study the MiniMed Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop (AHCL) system, which includes an algorithm with individualized basal target set points, automated correction bolus function, and improved Auto Mode stability. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This dual-center, randomized, open-label, two-sequence crossover study in automated-insulin-delivery-naive participants with type 1 diabetes (aged 7-80 years) compared AHCL to sensor-augmented pump therapy with predictive low glucose management (SAP + PLGM). Each study phase was 4 weeks, preceded by a 2- to 4-week run-in and separated by a 2-week washout. RESULTS: The study was completed by 59 of 60 people (mean age 23.3 ± 14.4 years). Time in target range (TIR) 3.9-10 mmol/L (70-180 mg/dL) favored AHCL over SAP + PLGM (70.4 ± 8.1% vs. 57.9 ± 11.7%) by 12.5 ± 8.5% (P < 0.001), with greater improvement overnight (18.8 ± 12.9%, P < 0.001). All age-groups (children [7-13 years], adolescents [14-21 years], and adults [>22 years]) demonstrated improvement, with adolescents showing the largest improvement (14.4 ± 8.4%). Mean sensor glucose (SG) at run-in was 9.3 ± 0.9 mmol/L (167 ± 16.2 mg/dL) and improved with AHCL (8.5 ± 0.7 mmol/L [153 ± 12.6 mg/dL], P < 0.001), but deteriorated during PLGM (9.5 ± 1.1 mmol/L [17 ± 19.8 mg/dL], P < 0.001). TIR was optimal when the algorithm set point was 5.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) compared with 6.7 mmol/L (120 mg/dL), 72.0 ± 7.9% vs. 64.6 ± 6.9%, respectively, with no additional hypoglycemia. Auto Mode was active 96.4 ± 4.0% of the time. The percentage of hypoglycemia at baseline (<3.9 mmol/L [70 mg/dL] and ≤3.0 mmol/L [54 mg/dL]) was 3.1 ± 2.1% and 0.5 ± 0.6%, respectively. During AHCL, the percentage time at <3.9 mmol/L (70 mg/dL) improved to 2.1 ± 1.4% (P = 0.034) and was statistically but not clinically reduced for ≤3.0 mmol/L (54 mg/dL) (0.5 ± 0.5%; P = 0.025). There was one episode of mild diabetic ketoacidosis attributed to an infusion set failure in combination with an intercurrent illness, which occurred during the SAP + PLGM arm. CONCLUSIONS: AHCL with automated correction bolus demonstrated significant improvement in glucose control compared with SAP + PLGM. A lower algorithm SG set point during AHCL resulted in greater TIR, with no increase in hypoglycemia.