Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: In persons with type 1 diabetes and high glycated hemoglobin levels, the benefits of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring with optional alarms for high and low blood glucose levels are uncertain. METHODS: In a parallel-group, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial involving participants with type 1 diabetes and glycated hemoglobin levels between 7.5% and 11.0%, we investigated the efficacy of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring as compared with participant monitoring of blood glucose levels with fingerstick testing. The primary outcome was the glycated hemoglobin level at 24 weeks, analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Key secondary outcomes included sensor data, participant-reported outcome measures, and safety. RESULTS: A total of 156 participants were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to undergo intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (the intervention group, 78 participants) or to monitor their own blood glucose levels with fingerstick testing (the usual-care group, 78 participants). At baseline, the mean (±SD) age of the participants was 44±15 years, and the mean duration of diabetes was 21±13 years; 44% of the participants were women. The mean baseline glycated hemoglobin level was 8.7±0.9% in the intervention group and 8.5±0.8% in the usual-care group; these levels decreased to 7.9±0.8% and 8.3±0.9%, respectively, at 24 weeks (adjusted mean between-group difference, -0.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.7 to -0.3; P<0.001). The time per day that the glucose level was in the target range was 9.0 percentage points (95% CI, 4.7 to 13.3) higher or 130 minutes (95% CI, 68 to 192) longer in the intervention group than in the usual-care group, and the time spent in a hypoglycemic state (blood glucose level, <70 mg per deciliter [<3.9 mmol per liter]) was 3.0 percentage points (95% CI, 1.4 to 4.5) lower or 43 minutes (95% CI, 20 to 65) shorter in the intervention group. Two participants in the usual-care group had an episode of severe hypoglycemia, and 1 participant in the intervention group had a skin reaction to the sensor. CONCLUSIONS: Among participants with type 1 diabetes and high glycated hemoglobin levels, the use of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring with optional alarms for high and low blood glucose levels resulted in significantly lower glycated hemoglobin levels than levels monitored by fingerstick testing. (Funded by Diabetes UK and others; FLASH-UK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03815006.).

Ambulance clinician use of capillary blood ketone meters to improve emergency hyperglycaemia care: A stepped-wedged controlled, mixed-methods feasibility study.

AIM: To determine whether it was feasible, safe and acceptable for ambulance clinicians to use capillary blood ketone meters for 'high-risk' diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) recognition and fluid initiation, to inform the need for a full-powered, multi-centre trial. METHODS: Adopting a stepped-wedge controlled design, participants with hyperglycaemia (capillary blood glucose >11.0 mmol/L) or diabetes and unwell were recruited. 'High-risk' DKA intervention participants (capillary blood ketones ≥3.0 mmol/L) received paramedic-led fluid therapy. Participant demographic and clinical data were collated from ambulance and hospital care records. Twenty ambulance and Emergency Department clinicians were interviewed to understand their hyperglycaemia and DKA care experiences. RESULTS: In this study, 388 participants were recruited (Control: n = 203; Intervention: n = 185). Most presented with hyperglycaemia, and incidence of type 1 and type 2 diabetes was 18.5% and 74.3%, respectively. Ketone meter use facilitated 'high-risk' DKA identification (control: 2.5%, n = 5; intervention: 6.5%, n = 12) and was associated with improved hospital pre-alerting. Ambulance clinicians appeared to have a high index of suspicion for hospital-diagnosed DKA participants. One third (33.3%; n = 3) of Control and almost half (45.5%; n = 5) of Intervention DKA participants received pre-hospital fluid therapy. Key interview themes included clinical assessment, ambulance DKA fluid therapy, clinical handovers; decision support tool; hospital DKA management; barriers to hospital DKA care. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulance capillary blood ketone meter use was deemed feasible, safe and acceptable. Opportunities for improved clinical decision making, support and safety-netting, as well as in-hospital DKA care, were recognised. As participant recruitment was below progression threshold, it is recommended that future-related research considers alternative trial designs. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT04940897.

Estimating the cost-effectiveness of intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes in England.

OBJECTIVE: We previously showed that intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) reduces HbA1c at 24 weeks compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose with finger pricking (SMBG) in adults with type 1 diabetes and high HbA1c levels (58-97 mmol/mol [7.5%-11%]). We aim to assess the economic impact of isCGM compared with SMBG. METHODS: Participant-level baseline and follow-up health status (EQ-5D-5L) and within-trial healthcare resource-use data were collected. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were derived at 24 weeks, adjusting for baseline EQ-5D-5L. Participant-level costs were generated. Using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model, economic analysis was performed from the National Health Service perspective over a lifetime horizon, discounted at 3.5%. RESULTS: Within-trial EQ-5D-5L showed non-significant adjusted incremental QALY gain of 0.006 (95% CI: -0.007 to 0.019) for isCGM compared with SMBG and an adjusted cost increase of £548 (95% CI: 381-714) per participant. The lifetime projected incremental cost (95% CI) of isCGM was £1954 (-5108 to 8904) with an incremental QALY (95% CI) gain of 0.436 (0.195-0.652) resulting in an incremental cost-per-QALY of £4477. In all subgroups, isCGM had an incremental cost-per-QALY better than £20,000 compared with SMBG; for people with baseline HbA1c >75 mmol/mol (9.0%), it was cost-saving. Sensitivity analysis suggested that isCGM remains cost-effective if its effectiveness lasts for at least 7 years. CONCLUSION: While isCGM is associated with increased short-term costs, compared with SMBG, its benefits in lowering HbA1c will lead to sufficient long-term health-gains and cost-savings to justify costs, so long as the effect lasts into the medium term.

Intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 1 diabetes: A subgroup analysis from the FLASH-UK study.

AIMS: The FLASH-UK trial showed lower HbA1c with intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM), as compared with self monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), in adults with type 1 diabetes and HbA1c ≥58 mmol/mol (≥7.5%). Here, we present results from the pre-specified subgroup analysis for the 24-week HbA1c (primary outcome) and selected sensor-based secondary outcomes. METHODS: This was a multi-centre, parallel-design, randomised controlled trial. The difference in treatment effect between subgroups (baseline HbA1c [≤75 vs. >75 mmol/mol] [≤9.0 vs >9.0%], treatment modality [pump vs injections], prior participation in structured education, age, educational level, impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia, deprivation index quintile sex, ethnic group and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9] detected depression category) were evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-six participants (females 44%, mean [SD] baseline HbA1c 71 [9] mmol/mol 8.6 [0.8%], age 44 [15]) were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio to isCGM (n = 78) or SMBG (n = 78). The mean (SD) baseline HbA1c (%) was 8.7 (0.9) in the isCGM group and 8.5 (0.8) in the SMBG group, lowering to 7.9 (0.8) versus 8.3 (0.9), respectively, at 24 weeks (adjusted mean difference -0.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.7 to -0.3; p < 0.001]. For HbA1c, there was no impact of treatment modality, prior participation in structured education, deprivation index quintile, sex or baseline depression category. The between-group difference in HbA1c was larger for younger people (a reduction of 2.7 [95% CI 0.3-5.0; p = 0.028] mmol/mol for every additional 15 years of age). Those with HbA1c 76-97 mmol/mol (>9.0%-11.0%) had a marginally non-significant higher reduction in HbA1c of 8.4 mmol/mol (3.3-13.5) compared to 3.1 (0.3-6.0) in those with HbA1c 58-75 mmol/mol (p = 0.08). For 'Time in range' (% 3.9-10 mmol/L), the difference was larger for those with at least a bachelor's degree. For 'Time below range' (% <3.9 mmol/L), the difference was larger for those using injections, older people and those with less than bachelor's degree. CONCLUSIONS: Intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring is generally effective across a range of baseline characteristics.

Perioperative use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors for diabetes mellitus.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is an increasingly common long-term condition, and suboptimal perioperative glycaemic control can lead to postoperative harms. The advent of new antidiabetic drugs, in particular glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, has enabled perioperative continuation of these medicines, thus avoiding the harms of variable rate i.v. insulin infusions whilst providing glycaemic control. There are differences between medicines regulatory agencies and organisations on how these classes that are most often used to treat diabetes mellitus, (but also in the case of SGLT2 inhibitors chronic kidney disease and heart failure in those without diabetes) should be managed in the perioperative period. In this commentary, we argue that GLP-1 receptor agonists should continue during the perioperative period and that SGLT2 inhibitors should only be omitted the day prior to a planned procedure . The reasons for the differing advice advocated between regulatory agencies and what anaesthetic practitioners should do in the face of continuing uncertainty are discussed.

Comparison of amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin, pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline, and duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin for the treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (OPTION-DM): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP) is common and often distressing. Most guidelines recommend amitriptyline, duloxetine, pregabalin, or gabapentin as initial analgesic treatment for DPNP, but there is little comparative evidence on which one is best or whether they should be combined. We aimed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of different combinations of first-line drugs for treatment of DPNP. METHODS: OPTION-DM was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, crossover trial in patients with DPNP with mean daily pain numerical rating scale (NRS) of 4 or higher (scale is 0-10) from 13 UK centres. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1:1), with a predetermined randomisation schedule stratified by site using permuted blocks of size six or 12, to receive one of six ordered sequences of the three treatment pathways: amitriptyline supplemented with pregabalin (A-P), pregabalin supplemented with amitriptyline (P-A), and duloxetine supplemented with pregabalin (D-P), each pathway lasting 16 weeks. Monotherapy was given for 6 weeks and was supplemented with the combination medication if there was suboptimal pain relief (NRS >3), reflecting current clinical practice. Both treatments were titrated towards maximum tolerated dose (75 mg per day for amitriptyline, 120 mg per day for duloxetine, and 600 mg per day for pregabalin). The primary outcome was the difference in 7-day average daily pain during the final week of each pathway. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN17545443. FINDINGS: Between Nov 14, 2017, and July 29, 2019, 252 patients were screened, 140 patients were randomly assigned, and 130 started a treatment pathway (with 84 completing at least two pathways) and were analysed for the primary outcome. The 7-day average NRS scores at week 16 decreased from a mean 6·6 (SD 1·5) at baseline to 3·3 (1·8) at week 16 in all three pathways. The mean difference was -0·1 (98·3% CI -0·5 to 0·3) for D-P versus A-P, -0·1 (-0·5 to 0·3) for P-A versus A-P, and 0·0 (-0·4 to 0·4) for P-A versus D-P, and thus not significant. Mean NRS reduction in patients on combination therapy was greater than in those who remained on monotherapy (1·0 [SD 1·3] vs 0·2 [1·5]). Adverse events were predictable for the monotherapies: we observed a significant increase in dizziness in the P-A pathway, nausea in the D-P pathway, and dry mouth in the A-P pathway. INTERPRETATION: To our knowledge, this was the largest and longest ever, head-to-head, crossover neuropathic pain trial. We showed that all three treatment pathways and monotherapies had similar analgesic efficacy. Combination treatment was well tolerated and led to improved pain relief in patients with suboptimal pain control with a monotherapy. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme.

Failure to control conventional cardiovascular risk factors in women with type 2 diabetes might explain worse mortality.

INTRODUCTION: The standardised mortality rate (SMR) for people with diabetes in England is 1.5-1.7, with differences in outcomes between sexes. There has been little work examining the factors that could have an impact on this or on what may determine sex differences in outcome. METHODS: Data were extracted for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Salford (England) in 2010 for the years up to 2020, including any deaths recorded. Expected deaths were calculated from annual Office of National Statistics mortality rate and life expectancy by age and gender, adjusted for the local Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD). This provided the SMR deprivation (SMRd), and life expectancy years lost per death (LEYLD). The effects of treatment type, and clinical features on SMRd relative to sex were examined by univariable and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Data from n = 11,806 (F = 5184; M = 6622) patients were included. Of these, n = 5540 were newly diagnosed and n = 3921 died (F = 1841; M = 2080). In total, n = 78,930 patient years. The expected deaths numbered n = 2596 (adjusted for age, sex, and IMD). Excess deaths were n = 1325 (F = 689; M = 636). Life expectancy years lost (LEYL) 18,989 (F = 9714; M = 9275). SMRd 1.51 (F = 1.60; M = 1.44) and LEYLD 4.84 years (F = 5.28; M = 4.46). The impact of risk factors was not different by sex. However, women had higher prevalence of % diagnosed >65 years of age; % last eGFR <60 mLs/min/1.73 m2 , and lower prevalence of % prescribed ACE-inhibitor/ARB, DPP4-inhibitor and SGLT2-inhibitor. Applying the male prevalence rate to the female population and expected mortality suggested n = 437 (55%) of excess T2D female deaths were attributed to sex difference in the prevalence of these risk and protective factors. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes in women with T2DM are worse than in men, contributed to by greater prevalence of adverse factors and less prescribing of cardioprotective medication.

Diabetes foot complications and standardized mortality rate in type 2 diabetes.

AIM: To quantify the impact of foot complications on mortality outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), and how routinely measured factors might modulate that risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data for individuals with T2D for 2010-2020, from the Salford Integrated Care Record (Salford, UK), were extracted for laboratory and clinical data, and deaths. Annual expected deaths were taken from Office of National Statistics mortality data. An index of multiple deprivation (IMD) adjusted the standardized mortality ratio (SMR_IMD). Life years lost per death (LYLD) was estimated from the difference between expected and actual deaths. RESULTS: A total of 11 806 T2D patients were included, with 5583 new diagnoses and 3921 deaths during 2010-2020. The number of expected deaths was 2135; after IMD adjustment, there were 2595 expected deaths. Therefore, excess deaths numbered 1326 (SMR_IMD 1.51). No foot complications were evident in n = 9857. This group had an SMR_IMD of 1.13 and 2.74 LYLD. In total, 2979 patients had any foot complication recorded. In this group, the SMD_IMR was 2.29; of these, 2555 (75%) had only one foot complication. Patients with a foot complication showed little difference in percentage HbA1c more than 58 mmol/mol. In multivariate analysis, for those with a foot complication and an albumin-to-creatinine ratio of more than 3 mg/mmol, the odds ratio (OR) for death was 1.93, and for an estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 60 mL/min/1.73m2 , the OR for death was 1.92. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with T2D but without a foot complication have an SMR_IMD that is only slightly higher than that of the general population. Those diagnosed with a foot complication have a mortality risk that is double that of those without T2D.

Glycaemic measures for 8914 adult FreeStyle Libre users during routine care, segmented by age group and observed changes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

AIM: To evaluate the impact of the stay-at-home policy on different glucose metrics for time in range (%TIR 3.9-10 mmol/L), time below range (%TBR < 3.9 mmol/L) and time above range (%TAR > 10 mmol/L) for UK adult FreeStyle Libre (FSL) users within four defined age groups and on observed changes during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: Data were extracted from 8914 LibreView de-identified user accounts for adult users aged 18 years or older with 5 or more days of sensor readings in each month from January to June 2020. Age-group categories were based on self-reported age on LibreView accounts (18-25, 26-49, 50-64 and ≥65 years). RESULTS: In January, prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the 65 years or older age group had the highest %TIR (57.9%), while the 18-25 years age group had the lowest (51.2%) (P < .001). Within each age group, TIR increased during the analysed months, by 1.7% (26-49 years) to 3.1% (≥65 years) (P < .001 in all cases). %TBR was significantly reduced only in the 26-49 years age group, whereas %TAR was reduced by 1.5% (26-49 years) to 3.0% (≥65 years) (P < .001 in both cases). The proportion of adults achieving both of the more than 70% TIR and less than 4% TBR targets increased from 11.7% to 15.9% for those aged 65 years or older (P < .001) and from 6.0% to 9.1% for those aged 18-25 years (P < .05). Mean daily glucose-sensor scan rates were at least 12 per day and remained stable across the analysis period. CONCLUSIONS: Our data show the baseline glucose metrics for FSL users in the UK across different age groups under usual care. During lockdown in the UK, the proportion of adults achieving TIR consensus targets increased among FSL users.

Effects of the Norfolk diabetes prevention lifestyle intervention (NDPS) on glycaemic control in screen-detected type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this trial was to test if the Norfolk Diabetes Prevention Study (NDPS) lifestyle intervention, recently shown to reduce the incidence of type 2 diabetes in high-risk groups, also improved glycaemic control in people with newly diagnosed screen-detected type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We screened 12,778 participants at high risk of type 2 diabetes using a fasting plasma glucose and glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c). People with screen-detected type 2 diabetes were randomised in a parallel, three-arm, controlled trial with up to 46 months of follow-up, with a control arm (CON), a group-based lifestyle intervention of 6 core and up to 15 maintenance sessions (INT), or the same intervention with additional support from volunteers with type 2 diabetes trained to co-deliver the lifestyle intervention (INT-DPM). The pre-specified primary end point was mean HbA1c compared between groups at 12 months. RESULTS: We randomised 432 participants (CON 149; INT 142; INT-DPM 141) with a mean (SD) age of 63.5 (10.0) years, body mass index (BMI) of 32.4 (6.4) kg/m2, and HbA1c of 52.5 (10.2) mmol/mol. The primary outcome of mean HbA1c at 12 months (CON 48.5 (9.1) mmol/mol, INT 46.5 (8.1) mmol/mol, and INT-DPM 45.6 (6.0) mmol/mol) was significantly lower in the INT-DPM arm compared to CON (adjusted difference -2.57 mmol/mol; 95% CI -4.5, -0.6; p = 0.007) but not significantly different between the INT-DPM and INT arms (-0.55 mmol/mol; 95% CI -2.46, 1.35; p = 0.57), or INT vs CON arms (-2.14 mmol/mol; 95% CI -4.33, 0.05; p = 0.07). Subgroup analyses showed the intervention had greater effect in participants < 65 years old (difference in mean HbA1c compared to CON -4.76 mmol/mol; 95% CI -7.75, -1.78 mmol/mol) than in older participants (-0.46 mmol/mol; 95% CI -2.67, 1.75; interaction p = 0.02). This effect was most significant in the INT-DPM arm (-6.01 mmol/mol; 95% CI -9.56, -2.46 age < 65 years old and -0.22 mmol/mol; 95% CI -2.7, 2.25; aged > 65 years old; p = 0.007). The use of oral hypoglycaemic medication was associated with a significantly lower mean HbA1c but only within the INT-DPM arm compared to CON (-7.0 mmol/mol; 95% CI -11.5, -2.5; p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The NDPS lifestyle intervention significantly improved glycaemic control after 12 months in people with screen-detected type 2 diabetes when supported by trained peer mentors with type 2 diabetes, particularly those receiving oral hypoglycaemics and those under 65 years old. The effect size was modest, however, and not sustained at 24 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN34805606 . Retrospectively registered 14.4.16.

Inpatient diabetes care during the COVID-19 pandemic: A Diabetes UK rapid review of healthcare professionals' experiences using semi-structured interviews.

AIMS: Inpatient care for people with diabetes can and must be improved. The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the way care is delivered across the UK. Diabetes UK needed to understand how inpatient care for people with diabetes has been affected and to identify opportunities, areas of concerns and recommendations for the future. METHODS: We interviewed 28 healthcare professionals and hospital teams from across the UK to find out about their experiences of delivering inpatient diabetes care during the first peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: We found that disruption to inpatient diabetes services created positive environments and opportunities for new ways of working, but in the minority, impacted on the quality of care clinicians felt they were able to deliver. CONCLUSIONS: It is important that these positive ways of working be maintained and as a result of these experiences we have outlined urgent recommendations for the challenging winter months ahead.

Impact of diabetes specialist nurses on inpatient care: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: People with diabetes have longer hospital stays and poorer clinical outcomes. Diabetes inpatient specialist nurses have been introduced to improve care. AIMS: To assess the evidence for the benefit of diabetes specialist nurses in the inpatient setting. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE (ovid), Embase (ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO) and Web of Science core collection from January 1998 to September 2019 was performed using key terms for diabetes specialist nurses and hospital setting. Studies measuring patient care using any standardised or validated outcome measures after introduction of a dedicated diabetes specialist nurse or nursing team were eligible for inclusion and findings reported by narrative synthesis. RESULTS: There were 10 studies which met the inclusion criteria. One was a randomised controlled study and the remaining nine studies were before and after studies with three of them using a time series analysis methodology. The majority reported length of stay (LOS) and showed a reduction in median LOS by between 0.5 and 3 days. Reductions in bed occupancy ranged from 39% to 47%. There was a paucity of evidence for outcomes related to patient care with some measures limited to single studies. These included a 52% reduction in total drug errors, improved patient knowledge, higher patient satisfaction and improved glycaemic control post-discharge. There was no reduction of mortality observed. CONCLUSIONS: These studies suggest a reduction in LOS and improved clinical care for patients with diabetes after the introduction of diabetes inpatient specialist nurses. Future research should examine a range of benefits associated with diabetes inpatient specialist nurse delivered services, including reduction of inpatient complications such as infections and cardiovascular events.

Association of British Clinical Diabetologists (ABCD) and Diabetes UK joint position statement and recommendations on the use of sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitors with insulin for treatment of type 1 diabetes (Updated October 2020).

Dapagliflozin (SGLT-2 inhibitor) and sotagliflozin (SGLT1/2 inhibitor) are two of the drugs of SGLT inhibitor class which have been recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in people with type 1 diabetes with BMI ≥27 kg/m2 . Dapagliflozin is licensed in the UK for use in the NHS while sotagliflozin may be available in future. These and possibly other SGLT inhibitors may be increasingly used in people with type 1 diabetes as new licences are obtained. These drugs have the potential to improve glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes with the added benefit of weight loss, better control of blood pressure and more time in optimal glucose range. However, SGLT inhibitors are associated with a higher incidence of diabetic ketoacidosis without significant hyperglycaemia. The present ABCD/Diabetes UK joint updated position statement is to guide people with type 1 diabetes and clinicians using these drugs help mitigate this risk and other potential complications. Particularly, caution needs to be exercised in people who are at risk of diabetic ketoacidosis due to low calorie diets, illnesses, injuries, starvation, excessive exercise, excessive alcohol consumption and reduced insulin administration among other precipitating factors for diabetic ketoacidosis.

Microangiopathy: Is it relevant to wound healing in diabetic foot disease?

Chronic diabetic complications - both microvascular and macrovascular - have become serious health issues with their increasing prevalence paralleling the dramatic rise of the diabetic population worldwide. Of these complications, foot disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality, consuming more health care resource than all other complications combined. Diabetic polyneuropathy and peripheral vascular disease constitute the two main risk factors, with trauma and foot infection being the most important initiating factors and contributors to delayed healing. Intracellular oxidative stress mediated by hyperglycaemia along with hypertension, dyslipidaemia and smoking constitute the main pathological processes in the aetiology of both macrovascular and microvascular disease. Whilst the former remains the major cause of overall mortality in diabetes, the role of microangiopathy in the pathogenesis of diabetes foot disease and its contribution to delayed wound healing in diabetes has yet to be fully understood and indeed continues to be debated. This article will review the key findings to date on structural and functional microvascular abnormalities in the diabetic foot skin and consider their contribution to impaired would healing.

Effectiveness of interventions to enhance healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes: a systematic review.

The management of diabetic foot ulcers (DFU) remains a challenge, and there is continuing uncertainty concerning optimal approaches to wound healing. The International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) working group on wound healing has previously published systematic reviews of the evidence in 2008, 2012 and 2016 to inform protocols for routine care and to highlight areas which should be considered for further study. The working group has now updated this review by considering papers on the interventions to improve the healing of DFU's published between June 2014 and August 2018. Methodological quality of selected studies was independently assessed by a minimum of two reviewers using the recently published 21-point questionnaire as recommended by IWGDF/European Wound Management Association, as well as the previously incorporated Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network criteria. Of the 2275 papers identified, 97 were finally selected for grading following full text review. Overall, there has been an improvement in study design and a significant rise in the number of published studies. While previous systematic reviews did not find any evidence to justify the use of newer therapies, except for negative pressure wound therapy in post-surgical wounds, in this review we found additional evidence to support some interventions including a sucrose-octasulfate dressing, the combined leucocyte, fibrin and platelet patch as well as topical application of some placental membrane products, all when used in addition to usual best care. Nonetheless, the assessment and comparison of published trials remains difficult with marked clinical heterogeneity between studies: in patient selection, study duration, standard of usual care provision and the timing and description of the clinical endpoints.

Guidelines on use of interventions to enhance healing of chronic foot ulcers in diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update).

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease since 1999. In conjunction with advice from internal and external reviewers and expert consultants in the field, this update is based on a systematic review of the literature centred on the following: the Population (P), Intervention (I), Comparator (C) and Outcomes (O) framework; the use of the SIGN guideline/Cochrane review system; and the 21 point scoring system advocated by IWGDF/EWMA. This has resulted in 13 recommendations. The recommendation on sharp debridement and the selection of dressings remain unchanged from the last recommendations published in 2016. The recommendation to consider negative pressure wound therapy in post-surgical wounds and the judicious use of hyperbaric oxygen therapy in certain non-healing ischaemic ulcers also remains unchanged. Recommendations against the use of growth factors, autologous platelet gels, bioengineered skin products, ozone, topical carbon dioxide, nitric oxide or interventions reporting improvement of ulcer healing through an alteration of the physical environment or through other systemic medical or nutritional means also remain. New recommendations include consideration of the use of sucrose-octasulfate impregnated dressings in difficult to heal neuro-ischaemic ulcers and consideration of the use of autologous combined leucocyte, platelet and fibrin patch in ulcers that are difficult to heal, in both cases when used in addition to best standard of care. A further new recommendation is the consideration of topical placental derived products when used in addition to best standard of care.

Definitions and criteria for diabetic foot disease.

Multiple disciplines are involved in the management of diabetic foot disease, and a common vocabulary is essential for clear communication. Based on the systematic reviews of the literature that form the basis of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) Guidelines, the IWGDF has developed a set of definitions and criteria for diabetic foot disease. This document describes these definitions and criteria. We suggest these definitions be used consistently in both clinical practice and research to facilitate clear communication between professionals.

Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery during Pregnancy in Women with Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: In patients with type 1 diabetes who are not pregnant, closed-loop (automated) insulin delivery can provide better glycemic control than sensor-augmented pump therapy, but data are lacking on the efficacy, safety, and feasibility of closed-loop therapy during pregnancy. METHODS: We performed an open-label, randomized, crossover study comparing overnight closed-loop therapy with sensor-augmented pump therapy, followed by a continuation phase in which the closed-loop system was used day and night. Sixteen pregnant women with type 1 diabetes completed 4 weeks of closed-loop pump therapy (intervention) and sensor-augmented pump therapy (control) in random order. During the continuation phase, 14 of the participants used the closed-loop system day and night until delivery. The primary outcome was the percentage of time that overnight glucose levels were within the target range (63 to 140 mg per deciliter [3.5 to 7.8 mmol per liter]). RESULTS: The percentage of time that overnight glucose levels were in the target range was higher during closed-loop therapy than during control therapy (74.7% vs. 59.5%; absolute difference, 15.2 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 6.1 to 24.2; P=0.002). The overnight mean glucose level was lower during closed-loop therapy than during control therapy (119 vs. 133 mg per deciliter [6.6 vs. 7.4 mmol per liter], P=0.009). There were no significant differences between closed-loop and control therapy in the percentage of time in which glucose levels were below the target range (1.3% and 1.9%, respectively; P=0.28), in insulin doses, or in adverse-event rates. During the continuation phase (up to 14.6 additional weeks, including antenatal hospitalizations, labor, and delivery), glucose levels were in the target range 68.7% of the time; the mean glucose level was 126 mg per deciliter (7.0 mmol per liter). No episodes of severe hypoglycemia requiring third-party assistance occurred during either phase. CONCLUSIONS: Overnight closed-loop therapy resulted in better glucose control than sensor-augmented pump therapy in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes. Women receiving day-and-night closed-loop therapy maintained glycemic control during a high proportion of the time in a period that encompassed antenatal hospital admission, labor, and delivery. (Funded by the National Institute for Health Research and others; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN71510001.).

Optimal wound closure of diabetic foot ulcers with early initiation of TLC-NOSF treatment: post-hoc analysis of Explorer.

OBJECTIVE: In March 2018, the Explorer study, an international, double-blind, randomised controlled trial (RCT), established that adding a TLC-NOSF (UrgoStart Contact, Laboratoires Urgo, France) dressing to good local standard of care (SoC) significantly and substantially increases wound closure and reduces the healing time of neuroischaemic diabetic foot ulcers (DFU). Besides the TLC-NOSF treatment, the wound duration was the only other covariate that had an influence on the wound closure rate in the regression model used in the original study. The purpose of this work was to further document the impact of wound duration on the healing outcomes of the DFUs included in the Explorer study and to discuss complementary pragmatic observations on the TLC-NOSF effect. METHOD: In this post-hoc analysis of the Explorer data, the wound closure rates by week 20 are reported for the global cohort (n=240, Intention-to-treat population) and for the treated (n=126) and control groups (n=114) according to DFU duration and location. RESULTS: For the combined group, wound closure rates decreased with the increase of wound duration at baseline (from 57% in wounds ≤2 months to 19% in wounds >11 months). Whatever the wound duration subgroups analysed, higher closure rates were reported in the TLC-NOSF group than in the control group. However, the maximal difference between the two treatments was reported in wounds with a duration of ≤2 months (71% versus 41%, 30 percentage points difference, Relative Risk 1.7, 95% Confidence Interval 1.1 to 2.8). Regarding wound location subgroup analyses, the outcomes were always in favour of the TLC-NOSF treatment, with closure rates ranging between 43% and 61% within the TLC-NOSF group, and between 25% and 40% within the control group. CONCLUSION: This clinical evidence supports that treating DFUs with TLC-NOSF dressing and good SoC results in higher wound closure rates than with a neutral dressing and the same good standard of care, whatever the duration and the location of the treated wounds. However, the earlier the TLC-NOSF dressing is initiated in DFU treatment, the greater the benefits.

Community-based pre-pregnancy care programme improves pregnancy preparation in women with pregestational diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Women with diabetes remain at increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes associated with poor pregnancy preparation. However, women with type 2 diabetes are less aware of and less likely to access pre-pregnancy care (PPC) compared with women with type 1 diabetes. We developed and evaluated a community-based PPC programme with the aim of improving pregnancy preparation in all women with pregestational diabetes. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study comparing pregnancy preparation measures before and during/after the PPC intervention in women with pre-existing diabetes from 1 June 2013 to 28 February 2017. The setting was 422 primary care practices and ten National Health Service specialist antenatal diabetes clinics. A multifaceted approach was taken to engage women with diabetes and community healthcare teams. This included identifying and sending PPC information leaflets to all eligible women, electronic preconception care templates, online education modules and resources, and regional meetings and educational events. Key outcomes were preconception folic acid supplementation, maternal HbA1c level, use of potentially harmful medications at conception and gestational age at first presentation, before and during/after the PPC programme. RESULTS: A total of 306 (73%) primary care practices actively participated in the PPC programme. Primary care databases were used to identify 5075 women with diabetes aged 18-45 years. PPC leaflets were provided to 4558 (89.8%) eligible women. There were 842 consecutive pregnancies in women with diabetes: 502 before and 340 during/after the PPC intervention. During/after the PPC intervention, pregnant women with type 2 diabetes were more likely to achieve target HbA1c levels ≤48 mmol/mol (6.5%) (44.4% of women before vs 58.5% of women during/after PPC intervention; p = 0.016) and to take 5 mg folic acid daily (23.5% and 41.8%; p = 0.001). There was an almost threefold improvement in 'optimal' pregnancy preparation in women with type 2 diabetes (5.8% and 15.1%; p = 0.021). Women with type 1 diabetes presented for earlier antenatal care during/after PPC (54.0% vs 67.3% before 8 weeks' gestation; p = 0.003) with no other changes. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: A pragmatic community-based PPC programme was associated with clinically relevant improvements in pregnancy preparation in women with type 2 diabetes. To our knowledge, this is the first community-based PPC intervention to improve pregnancy preparation for women with type 2 diabetes. DATA AVAILABILITY: Further details of the data collection methodology, individual clinic data and the full audit reports for healthcare professionals and service users are available from https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/clinical-audits-and-registries/our-clinical-audits-and-registries/national-pregnancy-in-diabetes-audit .