Utility of time in tight range (TITR) in evaluating metabolic control in pediatric and adult patients with type 1 diabetes in treatment with advanced hybrid closed-loop systems

Author:

Bahillo-Curieses Pilar,Fernández Velasco Pablo,Pérez-López Paloma,Vidueira Martínez Ana María,Nieto de la Marca María de la O,Díaz-Soto Gonzalo

Abstract

Abstract Purpose To analyze the time in tight range (TITR), and its relationship with other glucometric parameters in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) treated with advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) systems. Methods A prospective observational study was conducted on pediatric and adult patients with T1D undergoing treatment with AHCL systems for at least 3 months. Clinical variables and glucometric parameters before and after AHCL initiation were collected. Results A total of 117 patients were evaluated. Comparison of metabolic control after AHCL initiation showed significant improvements in HbA1c (6.9 ± 0.9 vs. 6.6 ± 0.5%, p < 0.001), time in range (TIR) (68.2 ± 11.5 vs. 82.5 ± 6.9%, p < 0.001), TITR (43.7 ± 10.8 vs. 57.3 ± 9.7%, p < 0.001), glucose management indicator (GMI) (6.9 ± 0.4 vs. 6.6 ± 0.3%, p < 0.001), time below range (TBR) 70–54 mg/dl (4.3 ± 4.5 vs. 2.0 ± 1.4%, p < 0.001), and time above range (TAR) > 180 mg/dl (36.0 ± 7.6 vs. 15.1 ± 6.4%, p < 0.001). Coefficient of variation (CV) also improved (36.3 ± 5.7 vs. 30.6 ± 3.7, p < 0.001), while time between 140–180 mg/dl remained unchanged. In total, 76.3% achieved TITR > 50% (100% pediatric). Correlation analysis between TITR and TIR and GRI showed a strong positive correlation, modified by glycemic variability. Conclusions AHCL systems achieve significant improvements in metabolic control (TIR > 70% in 93.9% patients). The increase in TIR was not related to an increase in TIR 140–180 mg/dl. Despite being closely related to TIR, TITR allows for a more adequate discrimination of the achieved control level, especially in a population with good initial metabolic control. The correlation between TIR and TITR is directly influenced by the degree of glycemic variability.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Reference26 articles.

1. M. Yaron, E. Roitman, G. Aharon-Hananel, Z. Landau, T. Ganz, I. Yanuv, A. Rozenberg, M. Karp, M. Ish-Shalom, J. Singer, J. Wainstein, I. Raz, Effect of flash glucose monitoring technology on glycemic control and treatment satisfaction in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 42(7), 1178–1184 (2019). https://doi.org/10.2337/dc18-0166

2. T. Danne, R. Nimri, T. Battelino, R.M. Bergenstal, K.L. Close, J.H. DeVries, S. Garg, L. Heinemann, I. Hirsch, S.A. Amiel, R. Beck, E. Bosi, B. Buckingham, C. Cobelli, E. Dassau, F.J. Doyle 3rd, S. Heller, R. Hovorka, W. Jia, T. Jones, O. Kordonouri, B. Kovatchev, A. Kowalski, L. Laffel, D. Maahs, H.R. Murphy, K. Nørgaard, C.G. Parkin, E. Renard, B. Saboo, M. Scharf, W.V. Tamborlane, S.A. Weinzimer, M. Phillip, International Consensus on use of continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care 40(12), 1631–1640 (2017). https://doi.org/10.2337/dc17-1600

3. T. Battelino, T. Danne, R.M. Bergenstal, S.A. Amiel, R. Beck, T. Biester, E. Bosi, B.A. Buckingham, W.T. Cefalu, K.L. Close, C. Cobelli, E. Dassau, J.H. DeVries, K.C. Donaghue, K. Dovc, F.J. Doyle 3rd, S. Garg, G. Grunberger, S. Heller, L. Heinemann, I.B. Hirsch, R. Hovorka, W. Jia, O. Kordonouri, B. Kovatchev, A. Kowalski, L. Laffel, B. Levine, A. Mayorov, C. Mathieu, H.R. Murphy, R. Nimri, K. Nørgaard, C.G. Parkin, E. Renard, D. Rodbard, B. Saboo, D. Schatz, K. Stoner, T. Urakami, S.A. Weinzimer, M. Phillip, Clinical targets for continuous glucose monitoring data interpretation: recommendations from the International Consensus on time in range. Diabetes Care 42(8), 1593–1603 (2019). https://doi.org/10.2337/dci19-0028

4. Z. Bloomgarden, Beyond HbA1c. J. Diabetes 9(12), 1052–1053 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-0407.12590

5. R.W. Beck, C.G. Connor, D.M. Mullen, D.M. Wesley, R.M. Bergenstal, The fallacy of average: how using HbA1c alone to assess glycemic control can be misleading. Diabetes Care 40, 994–999 (2017). https://doi.org/10.2337/dc17-0636

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3