1. Home
  2. diabetes mellitus, type 1

diabetes mellitus, type 1

Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Type 2 Diabetes and Beyond: A Review

Author/s: 
Dower, Justin A., Johansson, Minna, Camp, Anne W.

Importance Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), initially recommended primarily for people with type 1 diabetes, has rapidly expanded to patients with type 2 diabetes and, more recently, even to individuals without diabetes. This broadening use underscores the importance of critically examining the evidence supporting CGM across populations, clarifying where benefits are established, where they are modest, and where they remain uncertain.

Observations We reviewed systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials and clinical guidelines evaluating CGM use beyond type 1 diabetes, with particular attention to glycemic outcomes, hypoglycemia, patient-reported outcomes, and potential unintended consequences in nonpregnant adults. In adults with type 2 diabetes, evidence from randomized trials consistently demonstrated that CGM use was associated, on average, with a modest yet consistent reduction in hemoglobin A1c of approximately 0.3% compared with finger-stick monitoring or usual care; some patients benefited considerably more. Only limited and indirect evidence supported the adoption of CGM in people with type 2 diabetes not receiving glucose-lowering therapy or in those with prediabetes or obesity.

Conclusions and Relevance CGM should be deployed in response to a specific patient problem rather than as a default intervention. Deliberate, equitable deployment of CGM that is aligned with patient goals, clinical context, and system capacity will be necessary to ensure that those most likely to benefit are not left behind, while avoiding overuse in populations for whom benefit remains unproven.

Keywords 
type 2 diabetes continuous glucose monitoring

Management of Outpatients With Diabetes at High Risk of Hypoglycemia

Author/s: 
Celeste C Thomas, Karishma Chopra, Andrew M Davis

More than 30 million people in the US have diabetes, approximately 5% with type 1 and approximately 95% with type 2. About 5 million individuals in the US with type 2 diabetes use insulin and 7 million take sulfonylureas; both of these medications have a greater association with hypoglycemia than metformin, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, or sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. Each month, 70% of people with type 1 diabetes experience some degree of hypoglycemia.1 Level 1 hypoglycemia is defined as blood glucose of 54 to 70 mg/dL; level 2 is less than 54 mg/dL; and severe hypoglycemia (level 3) occurs when low blood glucose levels cause neurologic or physical symptoms that require help from others. Furthermore, recurrent severe hypoglycemia increases risk of future dementia.2 Hypoglycemia occurs more often in people with lower education, lower income, and food insecurity.3 This synopsis focuses on outpatient management of diabetes with high risk of hypoglycemia; the guideline also addresses prevention of hypoglycemia in hospitalized patients.4

Keywords 
diabetes Diabetes and Endocrinology Endocrinology insulin

The Management of Type 1 Diabetes in Adults. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)

Author/s: 
Holt, R. I. G., DeVries, J. H., Hess-Fischl, A., Hirsch, I. B., Kirkman, M. S., Klupa, T., Ludwig, B., Nørgaard, K., Pettus, J., Renard, E., Skyler, J. S., Snoek, F. J., Weinstock, R. S., Peters, A. L.

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) convened a writing group to develop a consensus statement on the management of type 1 diabetes in adults. The writing group has considered the rapid development of new treatments and technologies and addressed the following topics: diagnosis, aims of management, schedule of care, diabetes self-management education and support, glucose monitoring, insulin therapy, hypoglycemia, behavioral considerations, psychosocial care, diabetic ketoacidosis, pancreas and islet transplantation, adjunctive therapies, special populations, inpatient management, and future perspectives. Although we discuss the schedule for follow-up examinations and testing, we have not included the evaluation and treatment of the chronic microvascular and macrovascular complications of diabetes as these are well-reviewed and discussed elsewhere. The writing group was aware of both national and international guidance on type 1 diabetes and did not seek to replicate this but rather aimed to highlight the major areas that health care professionals should consider when managing adults with type 1 diabetes. Though evidence-based where possible, the recommendations in the report represent the consensus opinion of the authors.

Treatment-induced neuropathy of diabetes related to abrupt glycemic control

Author/s: 
Stainforth-Dubois, M., Mcdonald, E. G.

KEY POINTS
Rapid correction of glycemic control (i.e., > 2 percentage points of hemoglobin A1c) over 3 months may lead to treatment-induced neuropathy of diabetes.

Symptoms include painful neuropathy, autonomic dysfunction, gastroparesis, early worsening of retinopathy and microalbuminuria.

Women and people with type 1 diabetes are at elevated risk of treatment-induced neuropathy of diabetes.

Management of the condition may include involvement of a dietitian, adjustment of insulin dose and use of medications to improve symptoms such as painful neuropathy, postural hypotension and gastroparesis.

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2019 Abridged for Primary Care Providers

Author/s: 
American Diabetes Association

The American Diabetes Association’s (ADA’s) Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes is updated and published annually in a supplement to the January issue of Diabetes Care. The ADA’s Professional Practice Committee, which includes physicians, diabetes educators, registered dietitians (RDs), and public health experts, develops the Standards. The Standards include the most current evidence-based recommendations for diagnosing and treating adults and children with all forms of diabetes. ADA’s grading system uses A, B, C, or E to show the evidence level that supports each recommendation.

  • A—Clear evidence from well-conducted, generalizable randomized controlled trials that are adequately powered

  • B—Supportive evidence from well-conducted cohort studies

  • C—Supportive evidence from poorly controlled or uncontrolled studies

  • E—Expert consensus or clinical experience

This is an abridged version of the 2019 Standards containing the evidence-based recommendations most pertinent to primary care. The tables and figures have been renumbered from the original document to match this version. The complete 2019 Standards of Care document, including all supporting references, is available at professional.diabetes.org/standards.

Keywords 
standard of care guidelines diabetes diabetes, type 2 A1C

Choosing Wisely - 5 Things Physicians & Patients Should Question

Author/s: 
Subramanian, Usha, Burger, Alfred, Bailey, Jim, Gleason, Nathaniel, Pahwa, Amit

Don’t recommend daily home finger glucose testing in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus not using insulin.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is an integral part of patient self-management in maintaining safe and target-driven glucose control in type 1 diabetes mellitus. However, daily finger glucose testing has no benefit in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are not on insulin or medications associated with hypoglycemia, and small, but significant, patient harms are associated with daily glucose testing. SMBG should be reserved for patients during the titration of their medication doses or during periods of changes in patients’ diet and exercise routines.

Keywords 
diabetes home blood glucose monitoring insulin
Subscribe to diabetes mellitus, type 1