The Effects of Preoperative Glycaemic Control (HbA1c) on Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery Outcomes: Data from a Tertiary-Referral Bariatric Centre in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Current recommendations advocate the achievement of an optimal glucose control (HbA1c < 69 mmol/mol) prior to elective surgery to reduce risks of peri- and post-operative complications, but the relevance for this glycaemic threshold prior to Bariatric Metabolic Surgery (BMS) following a specialist weight management programme remains unclear. METHODS: We undertook a retrospective cohort study of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who underwent BMS over a 6-year period (2016-2022) at a regional tertiary referral following completion of a specialist multidisciplinary weight management. Post-operative outcomes of interest included 30-day mortality, readmission rates, need for Intensive Care Unit (ICU) care and hospital length of stay (LOS) and were assessed according to HbA1c cut-off values of < 69 (N = 202) and > 69 mmol/mol (N = 67) as well as a continuous variable. RESULTS: A total of 269 patients with T2D were included in this study. Patients underwent primary Roux en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB, n = 136), Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG, n = 124), insertion of gastric band (n = 4) or one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB, n = 4). No significant differences in the rates of complications were observed between the two groups of pre-operative HbA1c cut-off values. No HbA1c threshold was observed for glycaemic control that would affect the peri- and post-operative complications following BMS. CONCLUSIONS: We observed no associations between pre-operative HbA1C values and the risk of peri- and post-operative complications. In the context of a specialist multidisciplinary weight management programme, optimising pre-operative HbA1C to a recommended target value prior to BMS may not translate into reduced risks of peri- and post-operative complications.

Liraglutide 3.0 mg (Saxenda©) for Weight Loss and Remission of Pre-Diabetes. Real-World Clinical Evaluation of Effectiveness among Patients Awaiting Bariatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The effectiveness of liraglutide 3.0 mg (Saxenda) therapy to induce weight loss among obese patients prior to bariatric surgery remains uncertain. METHODS: Clinical data was retrospectively obtained from patients with prediabetes (HbA1c 42-47 mmol/mol) and selected patients on the waiting list for bariatric surgery at the Royal Derby Hospital. Clinical data was collected retrospectively at 6, 12, 26 and 52 week intervals. The outcomes included mean weight change, proportion of patients achieving ≥ 5% and ≥ 10% weight loss and achieving HbA1c reduction to normal range values. RESULTS: Fifty patients (mean age of 46.2 ± 10.5 years; 76% female and 94% had Class III obesity) who completed 52 and/or 26 weeks of treatment were included. Liraglutide 3.0 mg produced a consistent and statistically significant reduction in weight (kg), BMI (kg/m2) and HbA1c (mmol/mol) across all four time intervals. Average ± SD reduction for weight, BMI and HbA1c respectively at 26 weeks were: -10.9 ± 9.1 (P < 0.01), -3.67 ± 3.5 (P < 0.01), -4.7 IQR 4.95 (P < 0.001), and at 52 weeks were: -14 ± 9.2 kg (P < 0.001), -4.64 ± 4.0 (P < 0.001 and -5.5 IQR 4 (P = 0.009). 85.7% and 33.3% of patients achieved ≥ 5% and 10% weight loss target respectively at 52 weeks. 92.3% and 72.2% achieved remission of pre-diabetes by 6 and 12 months respectively. Liraglutide 3.0 mg was well-tolerated with only 10% discontinuing medication due to tolerability issues. CONCLUSION: Liraglutide 3.0 mg, with lifestyle management, reduced weight and improved glycaemic control. These results support liraglutide's application in certain high-risk populations, including patients waiting for bariatric surgical intervention.

Clinical Characteristics of COVID-19 Patients in a Regional Population With Diabetes Mellitus: The ACCREDIT Study.

Objective: To identify clinical and biochemical characteristics associated with 7- & 30-day mortality and intensive care admission amongst diabetes patients admitted with COVID-19. Research Design and Methods: We conducted a cohort study collecting data from medical notes of hospitalised people with diabetes and COVID-19 in 7 hospitals within the Mersey-Cheshire region from 1 January to 30 June 2020. We also explored the impact on inpatient diabetes team resources. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed and optimised by splitting the dataset into a training, test, and validation sets, developing a robust predictive model for the primary outcome. Results: We analyzed data from 1004 diabetes patients (mean age 74.1 (± 12.6) years, predominantly men 60.7%). 45% belonged to the most deprived population quintile in the UK. Median BMI was 27.6 (IQR 23.9-32.4) kg/m2. The primary outcome (7-day mortality) occurred in 24%, increasing to 33% by day 30. Approximately one in ten patients required insulin infusion (9.8%). In univariate analyses, patients with type 2 diabetes had a higher risk of 7-day mortality [p < 0.05, OR 2.52 (1.06, 5.98)]. Patients requiring insulin infusion had a lower risk of death [p = 0.02, OR 0.5 (0.28, 0.9)]. CKD in younger patients (<70 years) had a greater risk of death [OR 2.74 (1.31-5.76)]. BMI, microvascular and macrovascular complications, HbA1c, and random non-fasting blood glucose on admission were not associated with mortality. On multivariate analysis, CRP and age remained associated with the primary outcome [OR 3.44 (2.17, 5.44)] allowing for a validated predictive model for death by day 7. Conclusions: Higher CRP and advanced age were associated with and predictive of death by day 7. However, BMI, presence of diabetes complications, and glycaemic control were not. A high proportion of these patients required insulin infusion warranting increased input from the inpatient diabetes teams.

A Delphi survey of the views of adult male patients with personality disorders on psychoeducation and social problem-solving therapy.

BACKGROUND: Psychoeducation and social problem-solving therapy are treatment components that work well in tandem for offenders with personality disorders, hence it is worthwhile to maintain and improve their effectiveness. AIM: The aim was to seek patients' views of these therapies to contribute to their development. METHOD: A Delphi survey was conducted with all 12 male inpatients of a personality disorder hospital treatment unit. RESULTS: Round 1 produced 30 statements for psychoeducation and 59 for social problem-solving therapy to be rated in Round 2. There was consensus at a level of 70% for all items. Both psychoeducation and social problem-solving therapies were viewed as useful by these patients. The men also suggested improvements in psychoeducation, including minimizing the delay between assessment and feedback, provision of reference material, preparation for the work and support afterwards. Areas identified for improvement in social problem-solving therapy included more frequent review of progress, greater consistency of delivery, eliciting problems more effectively, providing reference material, supporting patients in group work, and the development of an advanced therapy. DISCUSSION: A Delphi approach to evaluation of therapies with the people receiving them is not only feasible but seems to offer a practical way of making useful clinical adjustments to the work. Further research with larger samples might usefully focus on whether such an approach enhances treatment compliance.