Nutritional Management of Athletes with Type 1 Diabetes: A Narrative Review.

Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) represents a complex clinical challenge for health systems. The autoimmune destruction of pancreatic beta cells leads to a complete lack of insulin production, exposing people to a lifelong risk of acute (DKA, coma) and chronic complications (macro and microvascular). Physical activity (PA) has widely demonstrated its efficacy in helping diabetes treatment. Nutritional management of people living with T1DM is particularly difficult. Balancing macronutrients, their effects on glycemic control, and insulin treatment represents a complex clinical challenge for the diabetologist. The effects of PA on glycemic control are largely unpredictable depending on many individual factors, such as intensity, nutrient co-ingestion, and many others. Due to this clinical complexity, we have reviewed the actual scientific literature in depth to help diabetologists, sport medicine doctors, nutritionists, and all the health figures involved in diabetes care to ameliorate both glycemic control and the nutritional status of T1DM people engaging in PA. Two electronic databases (PubMed and Scopus) were searched from their inception to January 2024. The main recommendations for carbohydrate and protein ingestion before, during, and immediately after PA are explained. Glycemic management during such activity is widely reviewed. Micronutrient needs and nutritional supplement effects are also highlighted in this paper.

Effect of a multidisciplinary team approach in patients with diabetic foot ulcers on major adverse limb events (MALEs): systematic review and meta-analysis for the development of the Italian guidelines for the treatment of diabetic foot syndrome.

The treatment of patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) is extremely complex, requiring a comprehensive approach that involves a variety of different healthcare professionals. Several studies have shown that a multidisciplinary team (MDT) approach is useful to achieve good clinical outcomes, reducing major and minor amputation and increasing the chance of healing. Despite this, the multidisciplinary approach is not always a recognized treatment strategy. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the effects of an MDT approach on major adverse limb events, healing, time-to-heal, all-cause mortality, and other clinical outcomes in patients with active DFUs. The present meta-analysis was performed for the purpose of developing Italian guidelines for the treatment of diabetic foot with the support of the Italian Society of Diabetology (Società Italiana di Diabetologia, SID) and the Italian Association of Clinical Diabetologists (Associazione Medici Diabetologi, AMD). The study was performed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. All randomized clinical trials and observational studies, with a duration of at least 26 weeks, which compared the MDT approach with any other organizational strategy in the management of patients with DFUs were considered. Animal studies were excluded. A search of Medline and Embase databases was performed up until the May 1st, 2023. Patients managed by an MDT were reported to have better outcomes in terms of healing, minor and major amputation, and survival in comparison with those managed using other approaches. No data were found on quality of life, returning-to-walking, and emergency admission. Authors concluded that the MDT may be effective in improving outcomes in patients with DFUs.

Development of the Italian clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of diabetic foot syndrome: design and methodological aspects.

AIMS: Diabetic foot syndrome (DFS) and its complications are a growing public health concern. The Italian Society of Diabetology (SID) and the Italian Association of Clinical Diabetologists (AMD), in collaboration with other scientific societies, will develop the first Italian guidelines for the treatment of DFS. METHODS: The creation of SID/AMD Guidelines is based on an extended work made by 19 panelists and 12 members of the Evidence Review Team. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology has been used to decide aims, reference population, and target health professionals. Clinical questions have been created using PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome) conceptual framework. The definition of questions has been performed using a two-step web-based Delphi methodology, a structured technique aimed at obtaining by repeated rounds of questionnaires a consensus opinion from a panel of experts in areas wherein evidence is scarce or conflicting, and opinion is important. RESULTS: The mean age of panelists (26.3% women) was 53.7 ± 10.6 years. The panel proposed 34 questions. A consensus was immediately reached for all the proposed questions, 32 were approved and 2 were rejected. CONCLUSIONS: The areas covered by clinical questions included diagnosis of ischemia and infection, treatment of ischemic, neuropathic, and infected ulcers, prevention of foot ulceration, organization and education issues, and surgical management. The PICO presented in this paper are designed to provide indications for healthcare professionals in charge of diabetic foot treatment and prevention, primarily based on clinical needs of people with diabetic foot syndrome and considering the existing organization of health care.