American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide updated and new evidence-based recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes mellitus to clinicians, diabetes-care teams, other health care professionals and stakeholders, and individuals with diabetes and their caregivers. METHODS: The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology selected a task force of medical experts and staff who updated and assessed clinical questions and recommendations from the prior 2015 version of this guideline and conducted literature searches for relevant scientific papers published from January 1, 2015, through May 15, 2022. Selected studies from results of literature searches composed the evidence base to update 2015 recommendations as well as to develop new recommendations based on review of clinical evidence, current practice, expertise, and consensus, according to established American Association of Clinical Endocrinology protocol for guideline development. RESULTS: This guideline includes 170 updated and new evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes. Recommendations are divided into four sections: (1) screening, diagnosis, glycemic targets, and glycemic monitoring; (2) comorbidities and complications, including obesity and management with lifestyle, nutrition, and bariatric surgery, hypertension, dyslipidemia, retinopathy, neuropathy, diabetic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease; (3) management of prediabetes, type 2 diabetes with antihyperglycemic pharmacotherapy and glycemic targets, type 1 diabetes with insulin therapy, hypoglycemia, hospitalized persons, and women with diabetes in pregnancy; (4) education and new topics regarding diabetes and infertility, nutritional supplements, secondary diabetes, social determinants of health, and virtual care, as well as updated recommendations on cancer risk, nonpharmacologic components of pediatric care plans, depression, education and team approach, occupational risk, role of sleep medicine, and vaccinations in persons with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: This updated clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to assist with person-centered, team-based clinical decision-making to improve the care of persons with diabetes mellitus.

Randomized controlled trial of insulin supplementation for correction of bedtime hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical guidelines recommend point-of-care glucose testing and the use of supplemental doses of rapid-acting insulin before meals and at bedtime for correction of hyperglycemia. The efficacy and safety of this recommendation, however, have not been tested in the hospital setting. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this open-label, randomized controlled trial, 206 general medicine and surgery patients with type 2 diabetes treated with a basal-bolus regimen were randomized to receive either supplemental insulin (n = 106) at bedtime for blood glucose (BG) >7.8 mmol/L or no supplemental insulin (n = 100) except for BG >19.4 mmol/L. Point-of-care testing was performed before meals, at bedtime, and at 3:00 a.m. The primary outcome was the difference in fasting BG. In addition to the intention-to-treat analysis, an as-treated analysis was performed where the primary outcome was analyzed for only the bedtime BG levels between 7.8 and 19.4 mmol/L. RESULTS: There were no differences in mean fasting BG for the intention-to-treat (8.8 ± 2.4 vs. 8.6 ± 2.2 mmol/L, P = 0.76) and as-treated (8.9 ± 2.4 vs. 8.8 ± 2.4 mmol/L, P = 0.92) analyses. Only 66% of patients in the supplement and 8% in the no supplement groups received bedtime supplemental insulin. Hypoglycemia (BG <3.9 mmol/L) did not differ between groups for either the intention-to-treat (30% vs. 26%, P = 0.50) or the as-treated (4% vs. 8%, P = 0.37) analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The use of insulin supplements for correction of bedtime hyperglycemia was not associated with an improvement in glycemic control. We conclude that routine use of bedtime insulin supplementation is not indicated for management of inpatients with type 2 diabetes.

Management of hyperglycemia during enteral and parenteral nutrition therapy.

Hyperglycemia is a frequent complication of enteral and parenteral nutrition in hospitalized patients. Extensive evidence from observational studies indicates that the development of hyperglycemia during parenteral and enteral nutrition is associated with an increased risk of death and infectious complications. There are no specific guidelines recommending glycemic targets and effective strategies for the management of hyperglycemia during specialized nutritional support. Managing hyperglycemia in these patients should include optimization of carbohydrate content and administration of intravenous or subcutaneous insulin therapy. The administration of continuous insulin infusion and insulin addition to nutrition bag are efficient approaches to control hyperglycemia during parenteral nutrition. Subcutaneous administration of long-acting insulin with scheduled or corrective doses of short-acting insulin is superior to the sliding scale insulin strategy in patients receiving enteral feedings. Randomized controlled studies are needed to evaluate safe and effective therapeutic strategies for the management of hyperglycemia in patients receiving nutritional support.

A double-blind, randomized clinical trial comparing soybean oil-based versus olive oil-based lipid emulsions in adult medical-surgical intensive care unit patients requiring parenteral nutrition.

OBJECTIVE: Parenteral nutrition has been associated with metabolic and infectious complications in intensive care unit patients. The underlying mechanism for the high risk of complications is not known but may relate to the proinflammatory effects of soybean oil-based lipid emulsions, the only Food and Drug Administration-approved lipid formulation for clinical use. DESIGN: Prospective, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Medical-surgical intensive care units from a major urban teaching hospital and a tertiary referral university hospital. PATIENTS: Adult medical-surgical intensive care unit patients. INTERVENTION: Parenteral nutrition containing soybean oil-based (Intralipid) or olive oil-based (ClinOleic) lipid emulsions. MEASUREMENTS: Differences in hospital clinical outcomes (nosocomial infections and noninfectious complications), hospital length of stay, glycemic control, inflammatory and oxidative stress markers, and granulocyte and monocyte functions between study groups. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were randomized to either soybean oil-based parenteral nutrition or olive oil-based parenteral nutrition for up to 28 days. A total of 49 patients received soybean oil-based parenteral nutrition (age 51 ± 15 yrs, body mass index 27 ± 6 kg/m2, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score 15.5 ± 7 [±SD]), and a total of 51 patients received olive oil-based lipid emulsion in parenteral nutrition (age 46 ± 19 yrs, body mass index 27 ± 8 kg/m2, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score 15.1 ± 6 [±SD]) for a mean duration of 12.9 ± 8 days. The mean hospital blood glucose concentration during parenteral nutrition was 129 ± 14 mg/dL, without differences between groups. Patients treated with soybean oil-based and olive oil-based parenteral nutrition had a similar length of stay (47 ± 47 days and 41 ± 36 days, p = .49), mortality (16.3% and 9.8%, p = .38), nosocomial infections (43% vs. 57%, p = .16), and acute renal failure (26% vs. 18%, p = .34). In addition, there were no differences in inflammatory and oxidative stress markers or in granulocyte and monocyte functions between groups. CONCLUSION: The administration of parenteral nutrition containing soybean oil-based and olive oil-based lipid emulsion resulted in similar rates of infectious and noninfectious complications and no differences in glycemic control, inflammatory and oxidative stress markers, and immune function in critically ill adults.

Vascular effects of intravenous intralipid and dextrose infusions in obese subjects.

Hyperglycemia and elevated free fatty acids (FFA) are implicated in the development of endothelial dysfunction. Infusion of soy-bean oil-based lipid emulsion (Intralipid®) increases FFA levels and results in elevation of blood pressure (BP) and endothelial dysfunction in obese healthy subjects. The effects of combined hyperglycemia and high FFA on BP, endothelial function and carbohydrate metabolism are not known. Twelve obese healthy subjects received four random, 8-h IV infusions of saline, Intralipid 40 mL/h, Dextrose 10% 40 mL/h, or combined Intralipid and dextrose. Plasma levels of FFA increased by 1.03±0.34 mmol/L (p=0.009) after Intralipid, but FFAs remained unchanged during saline, dextrose, and combined Intralipid and dextrose infusion. Plasma glucose and insulin concentrations significantly increased after dextrose and combined Intralipid and dextrose (all, p<0.05) and were not different from baseline during saline and lipid infusion. Intralipid increased systolic BP by 12±9 mmHg (p<0.001) and diastolic BP by 5±6 mmHg (p=0.022),and decreased flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) from baseline by 3.2%±1.4% (p<0.001). Saline and dextrose infusion had neutral effects on BP and FMD. The co-administration of lipid and dextrose decreased FMD by 2.4%±2.1% (p=0.002) from baseline, but did not significantly increase systolic or diastolic BP. Short-term Intralipid infusion significantly increased FFA and BP; in contrast, FFA and BP were unchanged during combined infusion of Intralipid and dextrose. Combined Intralipid and dextrose infusion resulted in endothelial dysfunction similar to Intralipid alone.

Medical nutrition therapy in hospitalized patients with diabetes.

Medical nutrition therapy (MNT) plays an important role in management of hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients with diabetes mellitus. The goals of inpatient MNT are to optimize glycemic control, to provide adequate calories to meet metabolic demands, and to create a discharge plan for follow-up care. All patients with and without diabetes should undergo nutrition assessment on admission with subsequent implementation of physiologically sound caloric support. The use of a consistent carbohydrate diabetes meal-planning system has been shown to be effective in facilitating glycemic control in hospitalized patients with diabetes. This system is based on the total amount of carbohydrate offered rather than on specific calorie content at each meal, which facilitates matching the prandial insulin dose to the amount of carbohydrate consumed. In this article, we discuss general guidelines for the implementation of appropriate MNT in hospitalized patients with diabetes.

Substitution of standard soybean oil with olive oil-based lipid emulsion in parenteral nutrition: comparison of vascular, metabolic, and inflammatory effects.

CONTEXT: Soybean oil-based lipid emulsions are the only Food and Drug Administration-approved lipid formulation for clinical use in parenteral nutrition (PN). Recently concerns with its use have been raised due to the proinflammatory effects that may lead to increased complications because they are rich in ω-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, controlled, crossover study comparing the vascular, metabolic, immune, and inflammatory effects of 24-h infusion of PN containing soybean oil-based lipid emulsion (Intralipid), olive oil-based (ClinOleic), lipid free, and normal saline in 12 healthy subjects. RESULTS: Soybean oil-PN increased systolic blood pressure compared with olive oil-PN (P < 0.05). Soybean oil PN reduced brachial artery flow-mediated dilatation from baseline (-23% at 4 h and -25% at 24 h, both P < 0.01); in contrast, olive oil PN, lipid free PN, and saline did not change either systolic blood pressure or flow-mediated dilatation. Compared with saline, soybean oil PN, olive oil PN, and lipid free PN similarly increased glucose and insulin concentrations during infusion (P < 0.05). There were no significant changes in plasma free fatty acids, lipid profile, inflammatory and oxidative stress markers, immune function parameters, or sympathetic activity between soybean oil- and olive oil-based lipid emulsions. CONCLUSION: The 24-h infusion of PN containing soybean oil-based lipid emulsion increased blood pressure and impaired endothelial function compared with PN containing olive oil-based lipid emulsion and lipid-free PN in healthy subjects. These vascular changes may have significant implications in worsening outcome in subjects receiving nutrition support. Randomized controlled trials with relevant clinical outcome measures are needed in patients receiving PN with olive oil-based and soybean oil-based lipid emulsions.

Special considerations on the management of Latino patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Latinos are the largest minority population in the United States, and are characterized by higher rates of obesity and diabetes compared to Whites. The prevalence of diagnosed diabetes in Latinos is two-fold higher than in Caucasians, and Latinos suffer from higher rates of diabetic complications and mortality. As the diabetes epidemic continues to expand and exert greater socioeconomic strain on national healthcare systems, the success of global and national healthcare initiatives for diabetes prevention and improvement of care will depend upon strategies targeted specifically toward this population. Essential to such strategies is an understanding of success factors unique to the Latino population for diabetes prevention and achievement of optimal treatment outcomes. METHODS: A PubMed search was conducted for literature describing type 2 diabetes and its complications in Latinos. Specifically, we sought data describing epidemiology, disparities, management considerations, and success factors in this population. RESULTS: The title search yielded more than 2000 articles, 80 of which were deemed directly relevant to this review. The inherent limitations of this subjective selection process are acknowledged. CONCLUSIONS: A number of studies have highlighted various ethnic disparities in Latinos with diabetes including higher HbA1c levels, greater rates of obesity and metabolic syndrome, and a larger proportion of individuals with inadequate access to care. While relatively fewer studies describe success factors for redressing cultural disparities in diabetes, the current body of literature supports primary care strategies aimed at effective provider-patient relationships and culturally tailored education and lifestyle modification regimens. Further research demonstrating effective, culturally tailored practices that are suitable to the primary care setting would be of value to providers treating Latinos with diabetes.

Effects of oral and intravenous fat load on blood pressure, endothelial function, sympathetic activity, and oxidative stress in obese healthy subjects.

We compared the effects of high and low oral and intravenous (iv) fat load on blood pressure (BP), endothelial function, autonomic nervous system, and oxidative stress in obese healthy subjects. Thirteen obese subjects randomly received five 8-h infusions of iv saline, 20 (32 g, low iv fat) or 40 ml/h intralipid (64 g, high iv fat), and oral fat load at 32 (low oral) or 64 g (high oral). Systolic BP increased by 14 ± 10 (P = 0.007) and 12 ± 9 mmHg (P = 0.007) after low and high iv lipid infusions and by 13 ± 17 (P = 0.045) and 11 ± 11 mmHg (P = 0.040) after low and high oral fat loads, respectively. The baseline flow-mediated dilation was 9.4%, and it decreased by 3.8 ± 2.1 (P = 0.002) and 4.1 ± 3.1% (P < 0.001) after low and high iv lipid infusion and by 3.8 ± 1.8 (P = 0.002) and 5.0 ± 2.5% (P < 0.001) after low and high oral fat load, respectively. Oral and iv fat load stimulated oxidative stress, increased heart rate, and decreased R-R interval variability. Acute iv fat load decreased blood glucose by 6-10 mg/dl (P < 0.05) without changes in insulin concentration, whereas oral fat increased plasma insulin by 3.7-4.0 µU/ml (P < 0.01) without glycemic variations. Intravenous saline and both oral and iv fat load reduced leptin concentration from baseline (P < 0.01). In conclusion, acute fat load administered orally or intravenously significantly increased blood pressure, altered endothelial function, and activated sympathetic nervous system by mechanisms not likely depending on changes in leptin, glucose, and insulin levels in obese healthy subjects. Thus, fat load, independent of its source, has deleterious hemodynamic effects in obese subjects.