Counter-regulatory responses to postprandial hypoglycaemia in patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia vs surgical and non-surgical control individuals.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Post-bariatric hypoglycaemia is an increasingly recognised complication of bariatric surgery, manifesting particularly after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. While hyperinsulinaemia is an established pathophysiological feature, the role of counter-regulation remains unclear. We aimed to assess counter-regulatory hormones and glucose fluxes during insulin-induced postprandial hypoglycaemia in patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass vs surgical and non-surgical control individuals. METHODS: In this case-control study, 32 adults belonging to four groups with comparable age, sex and BMI (patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy and non-surgical control individuals) underwent a postprandial hypoglycaemic clamp in our clinical research unit to reach the glycaemic target of 2.5 mmol/l 150-170 min after ingesting 15 g of glucose. Glucose fluxes were assessed during the postprandial and hypoglycaemic period using a dual-tracer approach. The primary outcome was the incremental AUC of glucagon during hypoglycaemia. Catecholamines, cortisol, growth hormone, pancreatic polypeptide and endogenous glucose production were also analysed during hypoglycaemia. RESULTS: The rate of glucose appearance after oral administration, as well as the rates of total glucose appearance and glucose disappearance, were higher in both Roux-en-Y gastric bypass groups vs the non-surgical control group in the early postprandial period (all p<0.05). During hypoglycaemia, glucagon exposure was significantly lower in all surgical groups vs the non-surgical control group (all p<0.01). Pancreatic polypeptide levels were significantly lower in patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia vs the non-surgical control group (median [IQR]: 24.7 [10.9, 38.7] pmol/l vs 238.7 [186.3, 288.9] pmol/l) (p=0.005). Other hormonal responses to hypoglycaemia and endogenous glucose production did not significantly differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The glucagon response to insulin-induced postprandial hypoglycaemia is lower in post-bariatric surgery individuals compared with non-surgical control individuals, irrespective of the surgical modality. No significant differences were found between patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia and surgical control individuals, suggesting that impaired counter-regulation is not a root cause of post-bariatric hypoglycaemia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04334161.

The impact of postbariatric hypoglycaemia on driving performance: A randomized, single-blind, two-period, crossover study in a driving simulator.

Postbariatric hypoglycaemia (PBH) is an increasingly recognized complication of bariatric surgery, but its effect on daily functioning remains unclear. In this randomized, single-blind, crossover trial we assessed driving performance in patients with PBH. Ten active drivers with PBH (eight females, age 38.2 ± 14.7 years, body mass index 27.2 ± 4.6 kg/m2 ) received 75 g glucose to induce PBH in the late postprandial period and aspartame to leave glycaemia unchanged, on two different occasions. A simulator was driven during 10 minutes before (D0) and 20 (D1), 80 (D2), 125 (D3) and 140 minutes (D4) after the glucose/aspartame ingestion, reflecting the expected blood glucose (BG) increase (D1), decrease (D2) and hypoglycaemia (D3, D4). Seven driving features indicating impaired driving were integrated in a Bayesian hierarchical regression model to assess the difference in driving performance after glucose/aspartame ingestion. Mean ± standard deviation peak and nadir BG after glucose were 182 ± 24 and 47 ± 14 mg/dL, while BG was stable after aspartame (85 ± 4 mg/dL). Despite the lack of a difference in symptom perception, driving performance was significantly impaired after glucose versus aspartame during D4 (posterior probability 98.2%). Our findings suggest that PBH negatively affects driving performance.

Performance of a factory-calibrated, real-time continuous glucose monitoring system during elective abdominal surgery.

We assessed the performance of the factory-calibrated, sixth-generation continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system Dexcom G6® (DexCom Inc., San Diego, California) during elective abdominal surgery. Twenty adults with (pre)diabetes undergoing abdominal surgery (>2 hours; 15 men, age 69 ± 13 years, glycated haemoglobin 53 ± 14 mmol/mol) wore the sensor from 1 week prior to surgery until hospital discharge. From induction of anaesthesia until 2 hours post-surgery, reference capillary glucose values were obtained every 20 minutes using the Accu-Chek® Inform II meter (Roche Diabetes Care, Mannheim, Germany). The primary endpoint was the mean absolute relative difference (ARD) between sensor and reference method during this period. In total, 1207 CGM/reference pairs were obtained. In the peri-operative period (523 pairs), mean ± SD and median (interquartile range [IQR]) ARD were 12.7% ± 8.7% and 9.9 (6.3;15.9)%, respectively, and 67.4% of sensor readings were within International Organization of Standardization 15197:2013 limits. CGM overestimated reference glucose by 1.1 ± 0.8 mmol/L (95% limits of agreement -0.5;2.7 mmol/L). Clarke error grid zones A or B contained 99.2% of pairs (A: 78.8%; B: 20.4%). The median (IQR) peri-operative sensor availability was 98.6 (95.9;100.0)%. No clinically significant adverse events occurred. In conclusion, the Dexcom G6 device showed consistent and acceptable accuracy during elective abdominal surgery, opening new avenues for peri-operative glucose management.

[Closed-loop systems - Update 2020]. / Closed-loop-Systeme ­ Update 2020.

Closed-loop systems - Update 2020 Abstract. The artificial pancreas (also referred to as a Closed-loop system) represents the latest development in diabetes therapy. Closed-loop systems autonomously direct subcutaneous insulin infusion via a control algorithm based on real-time continuous glucose monitoring. Closed-loop systems have been tested in clinical studies since 2011, and were shown to improve glucose control by reducing hyper- and hypoglycaemia as well as glucose variability when compared with conventional insulin pump therapy. In 2016, the US regulatory authority approved the first hybrid-closed-loop system for the treatment of type 1 diabetes. Hybrid-closed loop systems are not yet fully automated and still require the user to be actively involved for insulin dosing at mealtimes. In spite of the remarkable progress, the delayed action profile of subcutaneously administered insulin and the need to wear multiple devices on the body remain challenging. The present review article summarizes the current state of the art of closed-loop systems in diabetes care and will address technical aspects, evidence from clinical studies as well as future developments in the field.

Unraveling, contributing factors to the severity of postprandial hypoglycemia after gastric bypass surgery.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing prevalence of postbariatric hypoglycemia (PBH), a late metabolic complication of bariatric surgery, our understanding of its diverse manifestations remains incomplete. OBJECTIVES: To contrast parameters of glucose-insulin homeostasis in 2 distinct phenotypes of PBH (mild versus moderate hypoglycemia) based on nadir plasma glucose. SETTING: University Hospital (Bern, Switzerland). METHODS: Twenty-five subjects with PBH following gastric bypass surgery (age, 41 ± 12 years; body mass index, 28.1 ± 6.1kg/m2) received 75g of glucose with frequent blood sampling for glucose, insulin, C-peptide, and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP)-1. Based on nadir plasma glucose (

Relationship Between Symptom Perception and Postprandial Glycemic Profiles in Patients With Postbariatric Hypoglycemia After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Post-bariatric surgery hypoglycemia (PBH) is a metabolic complication of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Since symptoms are a key component of the Whipple's triad to diagnose nondiabetic hypoglycemia, we evaluated the relationship between self-reported symptoms and postprandial sensor glucose profiles. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Thirty patients with PBH after RYGB (age: 50.1 [41.6-60.6] years, 86.7% female, BMI: 26.5 [23.5-31.2] kg/m2; median [interquartile range]) wore a blinded Dexcom G6 sensor while recording autonomic, neuroglycopenic, and gastrointestinal symptoms over 50 days. Symptoms (overall and each type) were categorized into those occurring in postprandial periods (PPPs) without hypoglycemia, or in the preceding dynamic or hypoglycemic phase of PPPs with hypoglycemia (nadir sensor glucose <3.9 mmol/L). We further explored the relationship between symptoms and the maximum negative rate of sensor glucose change and nadir sensor glucose levels. RESULTS: In 5,851 PPPs, 775 symptoms were reported, of which 30.6 (0.0-59.9)% were perceived in PPPs without hypoglycemia, 16.7 (0.0-30.1)% in the preceding dynamic phase and 45.0 (13.7-84.7)% in the hypoglycemic phase of PPPs with hypoglycemia. Per symptom type, 53.6 (23.8-100.0)% of the autonomic, 30.0 (5.6-80.0)% of the neuroglycopenic, and 10.4 (0.0-50.0)% of the gastrointestinal symptoms occurred in the hypoglycemic phase of PPPs with hypoglycemia. Both faster glucose dynamics and lower nadir sensor glucose levels were related with symptom perception. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between symptom perception and PBH is complex, challenging clinical judgement and decision-making in this population.

Fully automated closed-loop glucose control compared with standard insulin therapy in adults with type 2 diabetes requiring dialysis: an open-label, randomized crossover trial.

We evaluated the safety and efficacy of fully closed-loop insulin therapy compared with standard insulin therapy in adults with type 2 diabetes requiring dialysis. In an open-label, multinational, two-center, randomized crossover trial, 26 adults with type 2 diabetes requiring dialysis (17 men, 9 women, average age 68 ± 11 years (mean ± s.d.), diabetes duration of 20 ± 10 years) underwent two 20-day periods of unrestricted living, comparing the Cambridge fully closed-loop system using faster insulin aspart ('closed-loop') with standard insulin therapy and a masked continuous glucose monitor ('control') in random order. The primary endpoint was time in target glucose range (5.6-10.0 mmol l-1). Thirteen participants received closed-loop first and thirteen received control therapy first. The proportion of time in target glucose range (5.6-10.0 mmol l-1; primary endpoint) was 52.8 ± 12.5% with closed-loop versus 37.7 ± 20.5% with control; mean difference, 15.1 percentage points (95% CI 8.0-22.2; P < 0.001). Mean glucose was lower with closed-loop than control (10.1 ± 1.3 versus 11.6 ± 2.8 mmol l-1; P = 0.003). Time in hypoglycemia (<3.9 mmol l-1) was reduced with closed-loop versus control (median (IQR) 0.1 (0.0-0.4%) versus 0.2 (0.0-0.9%); P = 0.040). No severe hypoglycemia events occurred during the control period, whereas one severe hypoglycemic event occurred during the closed-loop period, but not during closed-loop operation. Fully closed-loop improved glucose control and reduced hypoglycemia compared with standard insulin therapy in adult outpatients with type 2 diabetes requiring dialysis. The trial registration number is NCT04025775.