Comparing Equil patch versus traditional catheter insulin pump in type 2 diabetes using continuous glucose monitoring metrics and profiles.

AIMS: It is not clear whether there are differences in glycemic control between the Equil patch and the MMT-712 insulin pump. Our objective was to compare two types of insulin pumps in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics and profiles. METHODS: This was a randomized case-crossover clinical trial. Participants were hospitalized and randomly allocated to two groups and underwent two types of insulin pump treatments (group A: Equil patch-Medtronic MMT-712 insulin pump; group B: Medtronic MMT-712-Equil patch insulin pump) separated by a 1-day washout period. Glycemic control was achieved after 7-8 days of insulin pump therapy. Each patient received CGM for 5 consecutive days (from day 1 to day 5). On day 3 of CGM performance, the Equil patch insulin pump treatment was switched to Medtronic MMT-712 insulin pump treatment at the same basal and bolus insulin doses or vice versa. CGM metrics and profiles including glycemic variability (GV), time in range (TIR, 3.9-10.0 mmol/L), time below range (TBR, <3.9 mmol/L), time above range (TAR, >10.0 mmol/L), and postprandial glucose excursions, as well as incidence of hypoglycemia. RESULTS: Forty-six T2DM patients completed the study. There was no significant difference in parameters of daily GV and postprandial glucose excursions between the Equil patch insulin pump treatment and the Medtronic insulin pump treatment. Similarly, there was no between-treatment difference in TIR, TBR, and TAR, as well as the incidence of hypoglycemia. CONCLUSION: The Equil patch insulin pump was similar to the traditional MMT-712 insulin pump in terms of glycemic control. Equil patch insulin pump is a reliable tool for glycemic management of diabetes mellitus.

Hand grip strength is inversely associated with total daily insulin dose requirement in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cross-sectional study.

Background: Short-term (2 weeks to 3 months) insulin intensive therapy using continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) can improve islet beta cell function and prolong glycemic remission in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, the total daily insulin dose (TDD, IU/kg/d) required to achieve near-normoglycemic control with CSII still needs to be frequently adjusted based on blood glucose monitoring. Although real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM), which measures the interstitial fluid glucose concentration continuously without much difficulty, facilitates the adjustment of insulin dosage, its adoption in the T2DM population is strictly limited by insurance coverage and lack of awareness of rtCGM among clinicians. Thus, it is of clinical significance to identify easy-to-use parameters that may allow a more rapid and accurate prediction of TDD requirement. This study aimed to explore the association between hand grip strength (HGS) and TDD requirement in patients with T2DM receiving CSII therapy. Methods: A total of 180 eligible patients with T2DM were enrolled in the study and divided into three groups based on their HGS: low (L), medium (M), and high (H). The TDD requirement was calculated on day 7 or 8 of CSII treatment. Anthropometric parameters, including HGS, skeletal muscle mass, skeletal muscle index (SMI) and 6-m gait speed, and laboratory data, were collected on the morning of the second day after admission, within the first 24 h of CSII therapy. These parameters were used to identify significant predictors of TDD requirement using Pearson or Spearman correlation test, and stepwise multiple regression analysis. Results: There were no significant differences in age, duration of T2DM, waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), body mass index (BMI), blood pressure, liver function, estimated glomerular filtration rate, triglyceride, total cholesterol, glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), and homeostasis model assessment of beta cell function (HOMA-ß) among the groups. The H group had higher body muscle mass-to-fat ratio (BMFR), skeletal muscle mass-to-fat ratio (SMFR), SMI, 6-m gait speed, and lower TDD requirement than the M and L groups. The HGS negatively correlated with TDD requirement (r = -0.33, p < 0.001) after adjusting for sex, age, BMI, WHR, HbA1c, Ln (HOMA-ß), Ln (HOMA-IR), Ln (BMFR), Ln (SMFR), SMI, and 6-m gait speed. Multivariate stepwise regression analysis indicated that HGS was an independent predictor of TDD requirement in patients with T2DM (ß = -0.45, p < 0 001). Conclusion: Lower HGS is associated with an increased TDD requirement in T2DM patients. HGS may facilitate the prediction of TDD requirement in T2DM patients receiving CSII therapy.