Hybrid Closed-Loop Insulin Pump Technology Can Be Safely Used in the Inpatient Setting

Automated Insulin Delivery Technology in the Hospital: Update on Safety and Efficacy Data

OBJECTIVE

Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems are a rapidly growing component in the area of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy. As more patients use these systems in the outpatient setting, it is important to assess safety if their use is allowed to continue in the inpatient setting.

METHODS

Analysis was conducted of the records of patients using AID technology upon admission to our hospital between June 2020 and December 2022. Adverse events and glycemic control of AID users were compared with patients using non-AID systems and with patients who had CSII discontinued.

RESULTS

There were 185 patients analyzed: 64 on AID, 86 on non-AID, and 35 who had CSII discontinued. The number of patients on AID increased over the course of the observation period, whereas non-AID users decreased. Pairwise comparisons indicated that patient-stay mean glucose levels and percentage of hypoglycemic events were similar between all groups, but the percentage of patient hyperglycemic measurements was significantly lower in the AID cohort. No adverse events (diabetic ketoacidosis, pump site complications, equipment malfunction) were reported in any either CSII cohort.

CONCLUSION

The type of CSII technology encountered in the hospital is shifting from non-AID toward AID technologies. This analysis supports earlier findings that outpatient AID systems can be successfully transitioned into the inpatient setting. Further study is needed to define if AID systems offer any advantage in glycemic control.

Comparison of Metabolic Control in Children and Adolescents Treated with Insulin Pumps

BACKGROUND

While insulin pumps remain the most common form of therapy for youths with type 1 diabetes (T1DM), they differ in the extent to which they utilize data from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and automate insulin delivery.

METHODS

The aim of the study was to compare metabolic control in patients using different models of insulin pumps. This retrospective single-center study randomly sampled 30 patients for each of the following treatments: Medtronic 720G without PLGS (predictive low glucose suspend), Medtronic 640G or 740G with PLGS and Medtronic 780G. In the whole study group, we used CGM systems to assess patients' metabolic control, and we collected lipid profiles. In three groups of patients, we utilized CGM sensors (Guardian 3, Guardian 4, Libre 2 and Dexcom G6) to measure the following glycemic variability proxy values: time in range (TIR), time below 70 mg/dL (TBR), time above 180 mg/dL (TAR), coefficient of variation (CV) and mean sensor glucose.

RESULTS

Medtronic 640G or 740G and 780G users were more likely to achieve a target time in the target range 70-180 mg/dL (≥80%) [Medtronic 720G = 4 users (13.3%) vs. Medtronic 640G/740G = 10 users (33.3%) vs. Medtronic 780G = 13 users (43.3%); p = 0.0357)] or low glucose variability [Medtronic 720G = 9 users (30%) vs. Medtronic 640G/740G = 18 users (60%) vs. Medtronic 780G = 19 users (63.3%); p = 0.0175)].

CONCLUSIONS

Any integration between the insulin pump and CGM was associated with better glycemic control. More advanced technologies and artificial intelligence in diabetes help patients maintain better glycemia by eliminating various factors affecting postprandial glycemia.

Recent advances in the precision control strategy of artificial pancreas

The scientific diagnosis and treatment of patients with diabetes require frequent blood glucose testing and insulin delivery to normoglycemia. Therefore, an artificial pancreas with a continuous blood glucose (BG) monitoring function is an urgent research target in the medical industry. The problem of closed-loop algorithmic control of the BG with a time delay is a key and difficult issue that needs to be overcome in the development of an artificial pancreas. Firstly, the composition, structure, and control characteristics of the artificial pancreas are introduced. Subsequently, the research progress of artificial pancreas control algorithms is reviewed, and the characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages of proportional-integral-differential control, model predictive control, and artificial intelligence control are compared and analyzed to determine whether they are suitable for the practical application of the artificial pancreas. Additionally, key advancements in areas such as blood glucose data monitoring, adaptive models, wearable devices, and fully automated artificial pancreas systems are also reviewed. Finally, this review highlights that meal prediction, control safety, integration, streamlining the optimization of control algorithms, constant temperature preservation of insulin, and dual-hormone artificial pancreas are issues that require further attention in the future.

7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.