Diabetes on demand and novel technologies.

To date, the use of technology for the management of diabetes represents a promising area of innovation that can dramatically change diabetics' lives. In the past decade, the use of diabetes devices has widely grown and looks to have partially improved diabetes management. The combination of cloud technology with real-expert intervention saves time and improves efficiency, as well as empowering the patient. The application of mathematical models applied to diabetes therapy could lead to significant improvement in life quality and challenge the burden of hypoglycaemia. Events where an individual needs support are instantly achieved, triggering outreach alerts via cloud and wireless connectivity, thereby improving patient compliance and reducing disease costs.

Effect of GLP-1 and GIP on C-peptide secretion after glucagon or mixed meal tests: Significance in assessing B-cell function in diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to investigate the different B-cell responses after a glucagon stimulation test (GST) versus mixed meal tolerance test (MMTT). METHODS: We conducted GST and MMTT in 10 healthy people (aged 25-40 years) and measured C-peptide, gastric inhibitory peptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) at different time points after the administration of 1 mg i.v. glucagon for GST or a liquid mixed meal for MMTT. RESULTS: The GST stimulated C-peptide showed a mean increase of 147.1%, whereas the mean increase of MMTT stimulated C-peptide was 99.82% (Δincrease = 47.2%). Maximum C-peptide level reached with the MMTT was greater than that obtained with the GST (C-pept max MMTT = 2.35 nmol/L vs C-pep max GST = 1.9 nmol/L). A positive and linear correlation was found between the GST incremental area under the curve C-peptide and the MMTT incremental area under the curve C-peptide (r = 0.618, P = .05). After GST, there was no increment of GIP and glucagon like peptide-1 levels compared to baseline levels. A positive and linear correlation between GIP and C-peptide levels was observed only for the MMTT (r = 0.922, P = .008) indicating that in the GST, the C-peptide response is independent of the incretin axis response. CONCLUSIONS: Although the 2 stimulation tests may elicit a similar response in C-peptide secretion, B-cell response to MMTT depends on a functionally normal incretin axis. These results may have implications when investigating the B-cell response in people with diabetes and for studies in which stimulated C-peptide secretion is used as primary or secondary outcome for response to therapy.

In vivo corneal confocal microscopy as a novel non-invasive tool to investigate cardiac autonomic neuropathy in Type 1 diabetes.

AIMS: To investigate whether small nerve fibre degeneration detected using corneal confocal microscopy is associated with cardiac autonomic neuropathy in people with Type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Thirty-six people with Type 1 diabetes and 20 age- and sex-matched healthy control subjects were enrolled. Tests to determine heart rate response to deep-breathing (expiratory-to-inspiratory ratio), heart rate response to lying-to-stand test (30:15 ratio) and blood pressure response to standing were performed to detect cardiac autonomic neuropathy. Corneal confocal microscopy was performed to assess: corneal nerve density and corneal nerve beadings; branching pattern; and nerve fibre tortuosity. RESULTS: Compared with control participants, participants with Type 1 diabetes had fewer (mean ± SD 45.4 ± 20.2 vs 92.0 ± 22.7 fibres/mm²; P < 0.001) and more tortuous corneal nerve fibres (20 participants with Type 1 diabetes vs four control participants had nerve tortuosity grade 2/3; P = 0.022) and fewer beadings (mean ± SD 15.1 ± 3.5 vs 20.6 ± 5.0; P < 0.001). Of the participants with Type 1 diabetes, 11 met the criteria for the diagnosis of cardiac autonomic neuropathy. Corneal nerve density was significantly lower in participants with cardiac autonomic neuropathy than in those without (mean ± SD 32.8 ± 16.4 vs 51.7 ± 18.9 fibres/mm²; P = 0.008). This difference remained significant after adjustment for age (P = 0.02), gender (P = 0.04), disease duration (P = 0.005), insulin requirement (P = 0.02) and neuropathy disability score (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that corneal confocal microscopy could represent a new and non-invasive tool to investigate cardiac autonomic neuropathy in people with Type 1 diabetes. Larger studies are required to define the role of corneal confocal microscopy in the assessment of cardiac autonomic neuropathy.