Rifampicin in the Treatment of Refractory Diabetic Foot Ulcer and Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis-an Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: Refractory diabetic foot ulcer (rDFU) and osteomyelitis (diabetic foot osteomyelitis [DFO]) are a major problem in people with diabetes. Often resulting from multidrug-resistant polymicrobial infection, these may result in amputation or nonhealing ulcers. In this nonrandomized open-label study, we looked at the outcome of treatment with rifampicin in patients with nonhealing diabetic foot ulcers. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with DFUs (n = 67, n = 55 with DFO) unresponsive to conventional antimicrobial therapy for >3 months (rDFU) were taken as the study group. All patients received rifampicin for a minimum of 3 months (maximum 6 months if DUFs did not heal after 3 months) in addition to standard antibiotics and compared with similar kind of DFUs (n = 68, n = 55 DFO) who formed the control group, treated with conventional antimicrobial therapy. Patients were followed up for 12 months. Healing of DFU at 6 months and amputation were primary endpoints of the study. RESULTS: In total, 43 patients (64.2%) in the rifampicin group healed at 3 months and another 4 patients healed when rifampicin was continued for 6 months (n = 47, 70.1%). In the control group, 11 patients healed at 3 months (16.2%) and 25 patients healed at 6 months (36.8%). In total, 14 patients (20.9%) in the study group and 29 patients (42.6%) in the control group had to undergo minor amputation. Comparison between the rate of healing at 3 and 6 months and minor amputation between the study group and control group showed statistically significant results (P ≤ .00001, <.00001, and .008, respectively). In total, 6 and 8 patients despite healing of the primary ulcer had a subsequent recurrence of ulcer in the rifampicin and control group, respectively. CONCLUSION: Rifampicin used in conjunction with other standard poly-microbial therapy in refractory complex diabetic foot ulcer unresponsive to standard antimicrobial therapy, can significantly improve wound healing as well as decrease the need for amputation in addition to standard of care.

The effect of the different waves of COVID-19 pandemic on the outcome of diabetic foot ulcers.

AIMS: COVID-19 pandemic has massively impacted human health. We studied the effect of COVID-19 on outcome of Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: We recruited 483 people with DFUs from June 2020 to April 2022 (pandemic) together with a matched group of 226 people with DFU from March 2019 to March 2020 (pre-pandemic). Primary endpoint was outcome of ulcers-healed or amputation (major/minor). It was sub-analysed into 3 waves of COVID-19. Secondary endpoint was healing of individual types of DFUs. Basic anthropometric data included site and type of ulcer (ischemic or neuropathic), duration, presence or absence of infection and Wagner's grading of DFUs was collected for all patients. Diagnosis of peripheral neuropathy was done by monofilament testing and peripheral arterial disease by handheld Doppler and ankle brachial index (ABI). Standardized treatment protocol was provided. All patients were monitored for 6 months. RESULTS: In the pandemic group 323 (66.9%) patients in whom ulcers healed, 70 (14.5%) underwent minor amputation, 11 (2.2%) major amputation, 29 (6%) were lost to follow up, 22 (4.6%) were not healed. Rate of healing of DFU was higher (66.9% vs 53.5%) and rate of amputation was lower (16.7% vs 23.4%) in the pandemic group than in the pre-pandemic group (P = 0.001 and 0.037 respectively). Rate of healing in first, second and third wave was 65.4%, 75.2%, 58.3% respectively (P = 0.001). Neuropathic ulcers though less prevalent (49.8% vs 57.8%) in the first two waves than in the third wave, healing was better (79.3% vs 75.6%) in the first two waves than in the third wave (P = 0.085 and 0.488 respectively). Similarly, amputation rates in ischemic and neuro-ischemic ulcers were greater in the third wave than first two waves (46.7% vs 15.7%, P = 0.049). CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, healing of neuropathic ulcers was better, especially in the first and second waves and travel restriction may have accounted for this. However, worsening of ischemic and neuro-ischemic ulcers was observed with more amputation in these two groups. Conversely, in the third wave withdrawal of lockdown led to worsening of DFUs resulting in less healing and more amputation.

LSG vs OAGB: 7-Year Follow-up Data of a Randomised Control Trial and Comparative Outcome Based on BAROS Score.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to evaluate and compare long-term results of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) based on bariatric analysis reporting and outcome system (BAROS) score. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients operated for morbid obesity between 2013 and 2015 were randomised to LSG and OAGB groups. Based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, 201 patients (100 LSG and 101 OAGB) were analysed for changes in total body weight (TBW), body mass index (BMI), percent excess weight loss (%EWL), percent total weight loss (%TWL), QoL (quality of life) scores, comorbidity resolution and outcome based on BAROS at 7 years. RESULTS: Sixty-six LSG and 64 OAGB patients were followed up at 7 years. Mean pre-operative TBW and BMI were 119 ± 28.2 and 44.87 ± 7.71 for LSG group and 113.25 ± 23.74 and 44.71 ± 8.75 for OAGB group respectively. At 7 years after surgery, there was significant drop in mean TBW and BMI in both groups. Mean %EWL for LSG and OAGB patients was 50.78 ± 28.48 and 59.99 ± 23.32 and mean %TWL for LSG and OAGB patients was 23.22 ± 12.66 and 27.71 ± 12.27 respectively. Mean QoL scores at 7 years were significantly higher than the pre-operative scores and most of the patients in both groups had remission or improvement in their comorbidities. 68.76% OAGB patients had very good or excellent outcome on BAROS score while only 36.37% LSG patients had similar outcome. CONCLUSIONS: LSG and OAGB are successful bariatric procedures over the long term. OAGB outperforms LSG and has significantly higher %EWL and %TWL over the long term.

An overview of therapeutic options of obesity management in India: the Integrated Diabetes and Endocrinology Academy (IDEA) 2023 Congress update.

INTRODUCTION: With newer anti-obesity medications (AOMs) being introduced at a rapid pace, it is prudent to make a concise and updated clinical practice document that may help busy clinicians in daily clinical practice. A group of metabolic physicians, diabetologists, endocrinologists, and bariatric surgeons assembled during the Integrated Diabetes and Endocrine Academy 2023 Congress (IDEACON, July 2023, Kolkata, India) to compile an update of pharmacotherapeutic options for managing people with obesity in India. AREAS COVERED: After an extensive review of the literature by experts in different domains, this update provides all available information on the management of obesity, with a special emphasis on both currently available and soon-to-be-available AOMs, in people with obesity. EXPERT OPINION: Several newer AOMs have been shown to reduce body weight significantly, thus poised to make a paradigm shift in the management of obesity. While the tolerability and key adverse events associated with these AOMs appear to be acceptable in randomized controlled trials, pharmacovigilance is vital in real-world settings, given the absence of sufficiently long-term studies. The easy availability and affordability of these drugs is another area of concern, especially in developing countries like India.

LIVE INDIA: Effectiveness of Gla-100 in a Post hoc Pooled Analysis of FINE ASIA and GOAL Registries.

INTRODUCTION: Real-world evidence on insulin glargine 100 U/ml (Gla-100) initiation in Indian type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) individuals is limited. The present study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of Gla-100 in insulin-naïve T2DM participants from India. METHODS: This post hoc analysis includes real-world data of insulin-naïve Indian participants with T2DM who started Gla-100 treatment in two Asian registries: FINE ASIA and GOAL. Changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body weight, insulin dose, and incidence of hypoglycemia from baseline to 6 months were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 955 participants with T2DM were identified and analyzed. The mean [standard deviation (SD)] age and duration of diabetes were 54.7 (9.8) years and 9.8 (6.3) years, respectively. Mean HbA1c and FPG were significantly reduced after 6 months of Gla-100 treatment [- 2.07 (1.4) %; - 94.4 (65.2) mg/dl, respectively]. HbA1c targets of < 7.0% and < 7.5% were achieved by 292 (30.6%) and 589 (61.7%) study participants, respectively. The overall incidence of hypoglycemia was low (n = 52; 5.4%); only two participants (0.2%) reported severe hypoglycemia. Insulin was titrated with a mean (SD) increment of 2.5 (5.6) U/day after 6 months, leading to a mean Gla-100 dose of 18.2 (8.9) U/day. Mean body weight remained unchanged from baseline to 6 months (- 0.1 kg). CONCLUSION: In routine clinical practice, Gla-100 significantly improved glycemic parameters after 6 months of treatment with a low risk of hypoglycemia and no weight change in participants with T2DM.

Tailored one anastomosis gastric bypass - Subgroup analysis of a randomised control trial based on bilio-pancreatic limb length with long-term results of 101 patients.

Background: : Ideal bilio-pancreatic limb (BPL) length is a highly debatable issue in one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). Whether to use a tailored BPL or a fixed-length BPL needs to be answered. Materials and Methods: : One-hundred and one patients who have undergone tailored OAGB based on basal metabolic index (BMI) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) were analysed. Sixty-three patients had BPL of 150 cm and 38 patients had BPL of 180 cm. Mean pre-operative BMI of BPL 150 and 180 cm groups were 39.73 and 51.92 kg/m2, respectively. Results: There was a significant drop in mean total body weight, BMI and excess body weight of both the groups at 1 year which persisted for 5 years post-operatively. The mean BMI of BPL 150 and BPL 180 cm group at 5 years was 29.17 and 32.88 kg/m2, respectively. Although mean percentage excess weight loss (%EWL) and percentage of excess BMI loss in the two groups was similar, the mean percentage total weight loss (%TWL) was significantly higher for the BPL 180 cm group. There was no difference between the two groups in the number of patients who had >50% EWL and >20% TWL. At 5 years of follow-up, the mean serum iron level was significantly low in BPL 180 cm group. There was a significant drop in mean haemoglobin A1c values postoperatively, with no difference between the two groups. Conclusions: Tailored BPL of 150 and 180 cm do not show any difference in the number of patients achieving >50% EWL or >20% TWL and so increasing limb length may not increase the number of good responders for weight loss. Although the resolution of T2DM and improvement of QoL score do not change significantly with increase in BPL length, mean serum iron levels may be lower with longer BPL.

LSG vs MGB-OAGB: 5-Year Follow-up Data and Comparative Outcome of the Two Procedures over Long Term-Results of a Randomised Control Trial.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery is a durable and effective way for the management of obesity and resolution of related comorbidities. The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcome of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) over long term in a South Asian population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective randomised trial comparing the outcome of 100 and 101 LSG and OAGB patients respectively after 5-year follow-up. This study is in continuity with previous published papers with 1- and 3-year follow-up. 71 LSG and 73 OAGB patients followed at 5 years. The results of these patients were analysed and compared in terms of %EWL, comorbidity resolution and quality of life (QoL) at 5 years. Bariatric analysis reporting and outcome system (BAROS) was used to assess the outcome of patients. RESULTS: At 5-year follow-up, both LSG and OAGB patients performed well and patients had significant improvement in BMI (kg/m2). The mean preoperative BMI of LSG and OAGB patients was 44.89 ± 7.94 and 45.32 ± 8.24, and their mean BMI at 5 years was 33.41 ± 6.02, 30.80 ± 3.40 respectively. At 5 years, %EWL was 55.95 ± 27.01 and 65.28 ± 13.98 for LSG and OAGB patients respectively. The QoL score of LSG and OAGB patients was 1.86 ± 0.56 and 2.35 ± 0.41 while comorbidity score was 1.84 ± 0.68 and 2.24 ± 0.62 respectively at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Both LSG and OAGB are effective bariatric procedures over long term with respect to weight loss, comorbidity resolution and improvement in QoL. OAGB is significantly better than LSG in all the three parameters at 5 years.

Cardiovascular Safety of Gla-100: Reflections From the ORIGIN and ORIGINALE Trials.

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) risk in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is two to four folds higher than in individuals without T2DM. Insulin therapy was speculated to be atherogenic- thereby aggravating CVD risk years ago. However, cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) such as the Outcome Reduction with Initial Glargine Intervention (ORIGIN), and its extended follow-up study - ORIGIN and Legacy Effects (ORIGINALE) conclusively established the long-term cardiovascular (CV) safety of basal insulin, such as insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). Moreover, these studies hinted at the possible benefits of early insulin therapy-including stalling the progression of diabetes with minimal weight gain and hypoglycemia risk. This review highlights the background developments which led to the ORIGIN trial. Additionally, it also dwells on the critical insights to emerge from this trial pertaining to the CV safety of basal insulin Gla-100 in high CV risk individuals with T2DM.

Glimepiride and Metformin Combinations in Diabetes Comorbidities and Complications: Real-World Evidence.

Objective To evaluate the usage of various strengths of glimepiride and metformin fixed-dose combinations in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients with comorbidities and complications. Methods A retrospective, non-randomized, non-comparative, multi-centric real-world study included T2DM patients (age > 18 years) taking glimepiride and metformin fixed-dose combinations. Age, duration of diabetes, diabetes complications, comorbidities (hypertension and dyslipidemia), dosage frequency, and concomitant medications were analyzed from medical charts. Results A total of 4858 T2DM patients were included, with a mean age of 52.67 years and males being predominant in the study population (60.85%). The laboratory investigations showed a mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) of 7.5, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol of 104.81 ± 38.19 mg/dL, and serum creatinine of 0.88 ± 0.26 mg/dL. Around 2055 (42.30%) T2DM patients were hypertensive, and telmisartan alone and a telmisartan-based combination were the drugs of choice for hypertension management. Similarly, 1073 (22.08%) T2DM patients were having dyslipidemia and were primarily managed with rosuvastatin and its combination in 664 (62%) patients. Macrovascular complications were observed in 339 (6.97%) T2DM patients, among which coronary artery disease (CAD) had maximum prevalence, affecting 273 (5.61%) T2DM patients. Microvascular complications were 1010 (20.79%) T2DM patients, among which neuropathy had affected a maximum of 686 (14.12%) followed by retinopathy (2.34%) and nephropathy (1.81%). Among the available 11 strengths, the glimepiride 2 mg and metformin 500 mg combination were most widely prescribed in 1297 (26.69%), followed by glimepiride 1 mg and metformin 500 mg in 1193 (24.57%) patients, and the preferred dosage pattern was twice a daily in 2665 (54.85%) T2DM patients. An age-wise prescription analysis showed that glimepiride and metformin combinations were the preferred choice for the management of diabetes across all the age groups. Conclusion The real-world evidence in the Indian clinical setting indicates that glimepiride and metformin fixed-dose combinations are widely used in the management in T2DM patients with comorbidities like hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes complications. Glimepiride and metformin fixed-dose combinations are suitable for early as well as long-standing diabetes.

Long term outcomes after incident diabetic foot ulcer: Multicenter large cohort prospective study (EDI-FOCUS investigators) epidemiology of diabetic foot complications study: Epidemiology of diabetic foot complications study.

AIMS: This long-term prospective study evaluated limb amputation and mortality after the first neuropathic diabetic foot ulcer (DFU). METHODS: A total of 2880 patients with neuropathic DFU (DFU group) and a similar number of patients of diabetes without DFU (nDFU) matched for age and diabetes duration were prospectively assessed at five referral-centers over 14 years. Pre-defined outcome was death during follow-up. Various diabetic co-morbidities and amputation were assessed as mortality predictors. RESULTS: Overall, 501 (17.4%) patients in DFU group died compared to 89 (3.1%) (p < 0.01) in nDFU group during a median follow-up of 7(1-14) years. The 5- and 10-year mortality was 22% and 71% in the DFU group with a median survival of 7.72 (7.37-8.08) years compared to 3% (p < 0.01) and 5% (p < 0.01) and survival of 12.6 (10.5-12.7) years (p < 0.001) in nDFU group. 29.3% patients had limb amputations. The mortality risk was independent of glycemic control [OR 1.03 (0.80-1.32; p = 0.83)]. However, diabetes duration > 10 years [OR 1.31(1.02-1.70, p = 0.035)], nephropathy [OR 1.47 (1.04-2.09, p < 0.030)], minor 1.85 (1.40-2.44; p < 0.001) or major amputation 2.96 (2.01-4.34, p < 0.001)] predicted mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Every one-in-three individual with neuropathic DFU has amputation and every sixth individual has an early demise. Prevalent nephropathy and incident amputation following DFU predicts mortality.

Management of asymptomatic hyperuricemia: Integrated Diabetes & Endocrine Academy (IDEA) consensus statement.

AIM: The definition and management of asymptomatic hyperuricemia has been an area of controversy for many decades. Debate persists regarding the benefit of treating all cases of asymptomatic hyperuricemia and hence, unsurprisingly there are no clear clinical practice guidelines from our country. PARTICIPANTS: Ten members consisting of eminent physicians, endocrinologists, nephrologist and a rheumatologist were selected by the Integrated Diabetes & Endocrine Academy (IDEA) for a closed meeting with the aim to come to a consensus. EVIDENCE: A literature search was performed using PubMed and Cochrane library following which published articles in indexed peer review journals were selected. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Each participant voiced their opinion after reviewing the available data and a consensus was reached after three meetings by voting. CONCLUSION: Recommendations were made on important areas such as definition, investigation and management of asymptomatic hyperuricemia.

MGB-OAGB: Effect of Biliopancreatic Limb Length on Nutritional Deficiency, Weight Loss, and Comorbidity Resolution.

INTRODUCTION: Mini gastric bypass-one anastomosis gastric bypass (MGB-OAGB) has been approved as a mainstream metabolic/bariatric procedure by IFSO. Still there are lots of concerns regarding nutritional deficiency after MGB-OAGB. The purpose of this retrospective analysis is to evaluate the effect of biliopancreatic limb (BPL) length on weight loss, comorbidity resolution, and nutritional deficiencies in patients 1 year after MGB-OAGB and to find suitable BPL length. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred and one patients who underwent MGB-OAGB were divided into three groups of 150 cm, 180 cm, and 250 cm depending on the length of BPL bypassed. The nutritional parameters (vitamin D3, vitamin B12, serum iron, serum ferritin, total protein, serum albumin, serum globulin), anthropometric measurements (weight, BMI), and comorbidity resolution (T2DM, hypertension) were compared between the three groups at 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: There was statistically significant difference in number of patients having deficiencies in all the nutritional parameters except globulin between 150 cm and 250 cm groups (P < 0.05). While on comparing 180- and 250-cm group, a statistically significant difference was present in vitamin D3, vitamin B12, and total protein (P < 0.05) only. The difference was statistically insignificant between the three groups on T2DM, hypertension resolution, and %EWL but TWL between 150 cm vs 180 cm and 150 cm vs 250 cm showed significant difference. CONCLUSION: A 150-cm BPL length is adequate with very minimal nutritional complications and good results. A 180-cm BPL can be used in super obese while a 250-cm BPL should be used with utmost care as it results in significant nutritional deficiencies.

LSG vs MGB-OAGB-3 Year Follow-up Data: a Randomised Control Trial.

AIM: The objective of this study is to compare 3-year follow-up results of one anastomosis gastric bypass (MGB-OAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in terms of weight loss, complications, resolution of comorbidities and quality of life. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective randomised study of results between 100 LSG patients and 101 MGB-OAGB patients was done from 2012 to 2015. The results were compared regarding operative outcomes, percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL), complications, resolution of comorbidities and quality of life (BAROS score) at 3 years follow-up. RESULTS: Follow-up was achieved in 93 MGB-OAGB vs 92 LSG patients for 3-year period. The average %EWL for MGB-OAGB vs LSG was 66.48 vs 61.15% at the end of 3 years respectively, which was statistically insignificant. Diabetes remission was seen in 89.13% of MGB-OAGB patients and 81.82% of LSG patients. Remission of hypertension was seen in 74% of MGB-OAGB patients and 72.22% of LSG patients. Bariatric analysis reporting and outcome system (BAROS) with comorbidity in LSG patients and MGB-OAGB patients was 6.03 and 6.96 respectively, whereas in patients without comorbidity, BAROS score was 3.86 in LSG group and 4.34 in MGB-OAGB group. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, at 36 months follow up, there was no significant difference between LSG and MGB-OAGB in %EWL and remission of HTN. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remission rates were higher after MGB-OAGB as compared to LSG but the difference was statistically insignificant. MGB-OAGB patients with comorbidities have a better quality of life and BAROS score compared to LSG patients.

Predicting remission of diabetes post metabolic surgery: a comparison of ABCD, diarem, and DRS scores.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is one of the major causes for development of T2DM. Metabolic surgery has been proved to be a successful and cost-effective treatment modality for managing the patients with obesity and T2DM. Many scoring systems and models have been described in literature to predict the outcome of T2DM after metabolic surgery. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of Diarem, DRS, and ABCD score in predicting the T2DM remission. METHODS: A total number of 102 diabetic patients, who underwent LMGB/LOAGB, were selected for this study. A retrospective analysis of the three scoring systems when applied to these patients and their predictive abilities were analyzed. RESULTS: At 1 year after surgery, 72 (70.59%) patients achieved remission of T2DM. Though the pairwise comparisons between AUC on ROC analysis of ABCD, Diarem, and DRS scores does not show statistically significant difference between them, Diarem score has the maximum relative area under ROC curves. By multivariate analysis, it was found that factors significantly associated with T2DM remission were duration of T2DM, C-peptide, and Pre-Op HbA1c. CONCLUSIONS: Among the three scoring systems, though DiaRem score has the best sensitivity and specificity and maximum AUC, no statistically significant difference was found in their diabetes remission predicting abilities. A shorter duration of T2DM, a lower HbA1C, and higher levels of C-peptide were significantly associated with a higher chance of T2DM remission.

Consensus on "Basal insulin in the management of Type 2 Diabetes: Which, When and How?"

INTRODUCTION: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has attained epidemic proportions and continues to increase despite the availability of a number of oral antidiabetic medications and major advances made in insulin delivery since its discovery nearly a hundred years ago. One, amongst many other reasons responsible for the inability to achieve adequate glycaemic control in a substantial proportion of T2DM patients is the delayed initiation and inappropriate intensification of insulin treatment. Appropriate initiation and intensification of insulin is critical for the successful achievement of tight glycaemic control. OBJECTIVE: To provide simple and easily implementable guidelines to primary care physicians on basal insulin initiation and intensification, along with use of basal insulin in special situations (hepatic failure, renal failure and gestational diabetes mellitus). METHODS: Each consensus statement on basal insulin initiation, intensification and use of basal insulin in special situations was evaluated for dosing and titration based on established guidelines, data from approved pack inserts, prescribing information or summary of product characteristics for each insulin type, and published scientific literature. These evaluations were then factored into the national context based not only on the clinical experience of the expert committee representatives' but also based on the common therapeutic practices followed in India to successfully achieve optimal glucose control. RESULTS: Recommendations on initiation and intensification of basal insulin, and its use in special situations, have been developed. The key recommendations are to initiate basal insulin when 2 or 3 oral antidiabetic medications fail to achieve target glycaemic control, or in symptomatic patients with glycated haemoglobin value greater than 9%. Depending upon patient characteristics, any of the four available basal insulins [Neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH), Glargine (IGlar), Detemir (IDet), Degludec (IDeg)] can be used. However, IDeg has a longer duration of action, comparatively lesser hypoglycaemia (both overall and nocturnal) and more flexibility in administration timing compared to IGlar) and IDet. Inability to maintain glycaemic control should lead to prompt intensification of basal insulin treatment by adding mealtime insulin, consisting of one to three injections of either rapid-acting insulin analog or regular insulin; depending upon patient characteristics, intensification can also be achieved by transition from basal insulin to twice daily premixed insulin analogs/premixed human insulin/insulin co-formulations. IDeg/IDet can be used in all grades of renal and hepatic impairment; and IDet has been approved for use in gestational diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSIONS: We hope that these consensus based recommendations shall be a useful reference tool for health care practitioners and help them in initiating and intensifying insulin therapy in T2DM patients in order to achieve optimal glycaemic control.

LSG vs OAGB-1 Year Follow-up Data-a Randomized Control Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is one of the most popular bariatric procedure. One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is rapidly emerging as a safe and effective metabolic procedure. This study aims at comparing the 1-year follow-up results of OAGB and LSG in terms of excess weight loss, complications, resolution of comorbidities, and quality of life. METHODS: A prospective randomized study of results between 100 LSG and 101 OAGB patients was done from 2012 to 2015. The results were compared regarding operative outcomes, percentage of excess weight loss, complications, resolution of comorbidities, and quality of life (BAROS score). RESULTS: The mean BMI for the OAGB and LSG group was 44.31 and 43.75 kg/m2, respectively. Percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) for OAGB vs LSG was 66.87 ± 10.87 vs 63.97 ± 13.24 at 1 year (p > 0.05), respectively. Diabetes remission was 83.63 % in OAGB patients and 76.58 % in LSG patients. Remission of hypertension is 64.15 % in OAGB patients and 66.07 % in LSG patients. Bariatric Analysis Reporting and Outcome System (BAROS) was 3.71 in LSG and 3.96 in OAGB. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, there was no significant difference between LSG and OAGB in outcome at 1 year follow-up in % excess weight loss, remission of HTN, and quality of life. OAGB has marginally better outcome in T2 DM remission. However, a longer follow-up is required to establish a correct comparative result.