Effect of two carbohydrate-modified tube-feeding formulas on metabolic responses in patients with type 2 diabetes

Postprandial glycemic response to a high-protein diabetes-specific nutritional shake compared to isocaloric instant oatmeal in people with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled, crossover trial

Introduction

Minimizing postprandial glucose response is an important goal for overall diabetes management. Diabetes-specific nutritional shakes (DSNS) have been clinically shown to minimize postprandial glucose response in people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) compared to high-glycemic foods. However, it is unknown how a high-protein, low-fat DSNS impacts the GLP-1 response.

Methods

We tested the postprandial glucose, insulin, and GLP-1 response to a high-protein, low-fat diabetes-specific nutritional shake (DSNS-HP) compared to isocaloric instant oatmeal (IOM) in a randomized, controlled, crossover study in adults with T2DM (n = 24). Participants were randomly selected to receive IOM or DSNS-HP on two test days. Glucose, insulin, and total GLP-1 concentration were measured at baseline and 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, 180, and 240 min postprandially.

Results

Compared to IOM, the glucose-positive area under the curve (pAUC) was significantly lower (P = .021). DSNS-HP significantly increased GLP-1 pAUC response by 213% (P <.001) with a corresponding increase in insulin pAUC (P = .033) compared to IOM.

Discussion

A high-protein, low-fat DSNS leads to favorable changes in GLP-1 response and is a suitable option to minimize blood glucose response in people with type 2 diabetes.

Diabetes-Specific Complete Smoothie Formulas Improve Postprandial Glycemic Response in Obese Type 2 Diabetic Individuals: A Randomized Crossover Trial

This study aimed to compare newly developed diabetes-specific complete smoothie formulas with a standard diabetes-specific nutritional formula (DSNF) regarding their effects on glucose homeostasis, insulin levels, and lipid metabolism in obese type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients. We conducted a randomized, double-blind, crossover study with 41 obese T2DM participants to compare two developed diabetes-specific complete smoothie formulas, a soy-based regular smoothie (SM) and a smoothie with modified carbohydrate content (SMMC), with the standard DSNF, Glucerna. Glycemic and insulin responses were assessed after the participants randomly consumed 300 kilocalories of each formulation on three separate days with a 7-day gap between. Postprandial effects on glycemic control, insulin levels, and lipid metabolism were measured. SMMC resulted in a significantly lower glucose area under the curve (AUC0-240) compared to Glucerna and SM (p < 0.05 for both). Insulin AUC0-240 after SMMC was significantly lower than that after SM and Glucerna (p < 0.05). During the diets, the suppression of NEFA was more augmented on SM, resulting in a less total AUC0-240 of NEFA compared to the SMMC diet (p < 0.05). C-peptide AUC0-240 after SMMC was significantly lower than that after Glucerna (p < 0.001). Conversely, glucagon AUC0-240 after SMMC was significantly higher than that after SM and Glucerna (p < 0.05). These results highlight SMMC as the better insulin-sensitive formula, potentially achieved through increased insulin secretion or a direct reduction in glucose absorption. The unique composition of carbohydrates, amino acids, and fats from natural ingredients in the smoothies may contribute to these positive effects, making them promising functional foods for managing diabetes and obesity.

[Organoleptic evaluation of a diabetes-specific oral nutritional supplement with extra virgin olive oil in patients at nutritional risk and type 2 diabetes mellitus: Double-blind, randomized, crossover and multicenter clinical trial (DIACARE)]

Introduction

Introduction: oral nutritional supplements specific for diabetes (DSF) usually have a composition that favors their palatability and simultaneous glycemic and metabolic control. Objetive: to compare the sensory acceptability of a DSF with respect to a standard oral nutritional supplement (STF) in patients at risk of malnutrition with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Method: randomized, double-blind, crossover, multicenter, controlled, double-blind clinical trial. Odor, taste and perceived texture of a DSF and a STD were evaluated using a scale of 1 to 4. Results: twenty-nine patients were recruited and 58 organoleptic evaluations of the supplements were registered. A better evaluation of DSF was observed with respect to STD, although no statistically significant differences were reached: odor, 0.04 (CI 95 %) -0.49 to 0.56 (p = 0.092); taste, 0.14 (CI 95 %), -0.35 to 0.63 (p = 0.561); texture, 0.14 (CI 95 %), -0.43 to 0.72 (p = 0.619). No differences were found when analyzed by order of randomization, sex, degree of malnutrition, greater or lesser degree of complexity, greater or lesser time of evolution of diabetes, or by being older or younger. Conclusions: the specific nutritional supplement for diabetic patients formulated with extra virgin olive oil, EPA and DHA, a specific mixture of carbohydrates, and fiber, presented an adequate sensory acceptance by malnourished patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Glycaemic and insulinaemic impact of a diabetes-specific oral nutritional supplement with extra-virgin olive oil in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus at nutritional risk: a randomized, double-blind, crossover, multicentre clinical trial (DIACARE)

Introduction

Introduction: there is controversy about the usefulness of specific enteral nutrition formulas in malnourished patients with diabetes. The effects on blood glucose and other aspects of metabolic control are not fully understood in the scientific literature. Objective: the aim of the study was to compare the glycaemic and insulinaemic response of patients with type 2 diabetes at risk of malnutrition after oral feed between a diabetes-specific formula with AOVE (DSF) and a standard one (STF). Methods: A randomized, double-blind, crossover, multicentre clinical trial was conducted in patients with type 2 diabetes at risk of malnutrition (SGA). The patients were randomized to receive either DSF or STF, a week apart. A glycaemia and insulinaemia curve was made at times 0 minutes, 30 min, 60 min, 90 min, 120 min, and 180 min after the patients drank 200 ml of the oral nutritional supplement (ONS). The principal variables were the area under the curve (AUC0-t) of glucose and insulin. Results: 29 patients (51 % women) were included, who were on average 68.84 (SD 11.37) years old. Regarding the degree of malnutrition, 86.2 % presented moderate malnutrition (B) and 13.8 % severe (C). When the patients received the DSF, they had a lower mean of glucose AUC0-t (-3,325.34 mg/min/dl [95 % CI: -4,3608.34 to -2,290.07]; p = 0.016) and also a lower mean of insulin AUC0-t (-451.14 uU/min/ml [95 % CI: -875,10 to -27.17]; p = 0.038). There were no differences in the degree of malnutrition. Conclusion: compared with STF, DSF with AOVE showed a better glycaemic and insulinaemic response in patients with type 2 diabetes at risk of malnutrition.

Effects of a novel rice-based diabetes-specific formula on postprandial glucose and gastrointestinal hormones: a double-blinded multi-arm randomized crossover trial

Introduction

We developed a novel rice-based medical food for diabetes (MFDM) powder formula, using locally available ingredients in Thailand, which can potentially improve patient access to diabetes-specific formula (DSF) by reducing cost and improving availability.

Purpose

The goals of our studies were to 1) measure the glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) of the MFDM powder formula in healthy individuals, and 2) assess postprandial glucose, insulin, satiety, hunger, and gastrointestinal (GI) hormone responses in adults with prediabetes or early type 2 diabetes after consuming MFDM in comparison with a commercially available standard formula (SF) and a DSF.

Methods

In Study 1, glycemic responses were assessed using the area under the curve (AUC), which was used to calculate GI and GL. Study 2 was a double-blinded multi-arm randomized crossover trial enrolling participants with either prediabetes or type 2 diabetes of ≤6 years. At each study visit, participants consumed either MFDM, SF, or DSF which contained 25 g of carbohydrates. Hunger and satiety were assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS). Glucose, insulin, and GI hormones were assessed using AUC.

Results

All participants tolerated the MFDM well with no adverse events. In Study 1, the measured GI was 39 ± 6 (low GI) and GL was 11 ± 2 (medium GL). In Study 2, glucose and insulin responses were significantly lower after MFDM compared with SF (p-value<0.01 for both), however, those responses were similar between MFDM and DSF. MFDM suppressed hunger, promoted satiety, stimulated active GLP-1, GIP, and PYY, and suppressed active ghrelin although these changes were similar to SF and DSF.

Conclusions

MFDM had a low GI and a low-to-medium GL. In people with prediabetes or early type 2 diabetes, MFDM elicited reduced glucose and insulin responses when compared with SF. Rice-based MFDM may be an option for patients who are at risk for postprandial hyperglycemia.

Clinical Trial Registration

https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/show/TCTR20210731001, identifier TCTR20210731001; https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/show/TCTR20210730007, identifier TCTR20210730007.

Impact of preoperative carbohydrate loading on gastric volume in patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery advocates that consuming carbohydrates two hours before anesthesia is beneficial to the patient's recovery. Patients with diabetes are prone to delayed gastric emptying. Different guidelines for preoperative carbohydrate consumption in patients with diabetes remain controversial due to concerns about the risk of regurgitation, aspiration and hyperglycemia. Ultrasonic gastric volume (GV) assessment and blood glucose monitoring can comprehensively evaluate the safety and feasibility of preoperative carbohydrate intake in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients.

AIM

To evaluate the impact of preoperative carbohydrate loading on GV before anesthesia induction in T2D patients.

METHODS

Patients with T2D receiving surgery under general anesthesia from December 2019 to December 2020 were included. A total of 78 patients were randomly allocated to 4 groups receiving 0, 100, 200, or 300 mL of carbohydrate loading 2 h before anesthesia induction. Gastric volume per unit weight (GV/W), Perlas grade, changes in blood glucose level, and risk of reflux and aspiration were evaluated before anesthesia induction.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found in GV/W among the groups before anesthesia induction (P > 0.05). The number of patients with Perlas grade II and GV/W > 1.5 mL/kg did not differ among the groups (P > 0.05). Blood glucose level increased by > 2 mmol/L in patients receiving 300 mL carbohydrate drink, which was significantly higher than that in groups 1 and 2 (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative carbohydrate loading < 300 mL 2 h before induction of anesthesia in patients with T2D did not affect GV or increase the risk of reflux and aspiration. Blood glucose levels did not change significantly with preoperative carbohydrate loading of < 200 mL. However, 300 mL carbohydrate loading may increase blood glucose levels in patients with T2D before induction of anesthesia.

Therapeutic Properties and Use of Extra Virgin Olive Oil in Clinical Nutrition: A Narrative Review and Literature Update

Extra virgin olive oil (EVOO) is a cornerstone of the Mediterranean diet (MedD). In this narrative review, we synthesize and illustrate the various characteristics and clinical applications of EVOO and its components—such as oleic acid, hydroxytyrosol, and oleuropein—in the field of clinical nutrition and dietetics. The evidence is split into diet therapy, oleic acid-based enteral nutrition formulations and oral supplementation formulations, oleic acid-based parenteral nutrition, and nutraceutical supplementation of minor components of EVOO. EVOO has diverse beneficial health properties, and current evidence supports the use of whole EVOO in diet therapy and the supplementation of its minor components to improve cardiovascular health, lipoprotein metabolism, and diabetes mellitus in clinical nutrition. Nevertheless, more intervention studies in humans are needed to chisel specific recommendations for its therapeutic use through different formulations in other specific diseases and clinical populations.

Glycemic Response to a Renal-Specific Oral Nutritional Supplement in Patients With Diabetes Undergoing Hemodialysis: A Randomized Crossover Trial

BACKGROUND

Diabetes and malnutrition are common in patients with kidney failure. We aimed to evaluate the postprandial glucose response to oral nutritional supplement drinks (ONSs) in patients with diabetes undergoing hemodialysis treatment.

METHODS

A randomized, single-blind crossover study was conducted in patients with diabetes, and requiring chronic hemodialysis. Patients consumed either a renal-specific ONS, macronutrient-matched ONS, or standard ONS on 3 separate study days, during dialysis, following an overnight fast. Blood was collected before and 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, 120, and 180 minutes post ingestion. Mean net incremental area under the curve (iAUC) and peak incremental blood glucose concentration were compared across conditions, using analyses of variance.

RESULTS

Consumption of the renal-specific ONS resulted in the lowest mean net iAUC (87.9 ± 169.0 mmol/L per 3 hours) compared with macronutrient-matched (188.0 ± 127.5 mmol/L per 3 hours) and standard ONS (199.5 ± 169.2 mmol/L per 3 hours) (F_2,30 = 5.115, P = 0.012, partial n² = 0.254). Pairwise comparisons demonstrated a mean difference of 100.1 mmol/L per 3 hours (95% CI, -2.8 to 202.9) in mean iAUC between the renal-specific ONS and macronutrient-matched ONS (P = 0.058). Peak blood glucose concentration, corrected for baseline, was significantly lower after the renal-specific ONS (1.40 ± 1.0 mmol/L) compared with both macronutrient-matched (2.02 ± 0.71 mmol/L, P = 0.036) and standard ONS (2.3 ± 1.06 mmol/L, P = 0.017).

CONCLUSION

A renal-specific ONS elicits a lower postprandial glucose response than either macronutrient-matched ONS or standard ONS in patients with diabetes during hemodialysis.

Use of a diabetes-specific nutritional shake to replace a daily breakfast and afternoon snack improves glycemic responses assessed by continuous glucose monitoring in people with type 2 diabetes: a randomized clinical pilot study

INTRODUCTION

This pilot study evaluated the impact of a diabetes-specific nutritional shake (DSNS) used twice daily by people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) on glycemic response assessed by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Adults (n=81) with T2D managed by oral medications were studied in a randomized, open-label, three-group parallel study design. The study was conducted in two phases over 14 days: Baseline (days 1-6), during which study participants consumed their habitual self-selected diets (SSD), followed by the Intervention (days 7-14), during which participants were randomized as follows: (1) SSD group received no study product (n=32); (2) DSNS breakfast/afternoon snack (Bkfst/AS) group consumed one DSNS as a breakfast meal replacement and a second to replace their mid-afternoon snack (n=24); (3) DSNS breakfast/prebed snack (Bkfst/PBS) group consumed one DSNS as a breakfast meal replacement and added a second as a prebed snack (n=25). Glucose was assessed by CGM throughout the study. Additionally, participants were asked about snacking behaviors, cravings, and other questions related to the use of DSNS as meal replacements and snacks.

RESULTS

All groups reduced their postprandial glycemic response (positive area under the curve (pAUC, mg/min*dL^-1)) and adjusted peak value (mg/dL) when compared with the baseline phase. Participants consuming DSNS in place of their usual breakfast showed greater reductions in pAUC compared with the SSD group (p=0.008) for the DSNS Bkfst/AS group with a trend (p=0.069) for the DSNS Bkfst/PBS group. Adjusted peak value showed greater reductions in both DSNS groups as compared with the SSD group (p=0.002 for DSNS Bkfst/AS and p=0.010 for DSNS Bkfst/PBS). Nocturnal glucose variability was significantly decreased during the intervention phase compared with baseline phase in the DSNS Bkfst/AS group (p=0.020), with no significant differences between groups. After intervention, the DSNS Bkfst/AS group had a significantly lower percentage of participants (17%) reporting cravings for starchy meals/sides compared with before the study (33%) (p=0.046). This group also reported a significant increase in confidence in choosing foods to control their diabetes (from 58.3% to 91.7%, preintervention vs postintervention, respectively, p=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of DSNS to replace breakfast and as an afternoon snack improves both glycemic control and behavioral factors related to dietary management of diabetes.

TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04230889.

The Role of Dietary Carbohydrates in Gestational Diabetes

Gestational diabetes (GDM) is hyperglycemia that is recognized for the first time during pregnancy. GDM is associated with a wide range of short- and long-term adverse health consequences for both mother and offspring. It is a complex disease with a multifactorial etiology, with disturbances in glucose, lipid, inflammation and gut microbiota. Consequently, its management is complex, requiring patients to self-manage their diet, lifestyle and self-care behaviors in combination with use of insulin. In addition to nutritional recommendations for all pregnant women, special attention to dietary carbohydrate (CHO) amount and type on glucose levels is especially important in GDM. Dietary CHO are diverse, ranging from simple sugars to longer-chain oligo- and poly- saccharides which have diverse effects on blood glucose, microbial fermentation and bowel function. Studies have established that dietary CHO amount and type can impact maternal glucose and nutritional recommendations advise women with GDM to limit total intake or choose complex and low glycemic CHO. However, robust maternal and infant benefits are not consistently shown. Novel approaches which help women with GDM adhere to dietary recommendations such as diabetes-specific meal replacements (which provide a defined and complete nutritional composition with slowly-digested CHO) and continuous glucose monitors (which provide unlimited monitoring of maternal glycemic fluctuations) have shown benefits on both maternal and neonatal outcomes. Continued research is needed to understand and develop tools to facilitate patient adherence to treatment goals, individualize interventions and improve outcomes.

The Effect of Diabetes-Specific Enteral Nutrition Formula on Cardiometabolic Parameters in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of diabetes is on the increase in the UK and worldwide, partly due to unhealthy lifestyles, including poor dietary regimes. Patients with diabetes and other co-morbidities such as stroke, which may affect swallowing ability and lead to malnutrition, could benefit from enteral nutrition, including the standard formula (SF) and diabetes-specific formulas (DSF). However, enteral nutrition presents its challenges due to its effect on glycaemic control and lipid profile.

AIM

The aim of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness of diabetes-specific enteral nutrition formula versus SF in managing cardiometabolic parameters in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHOD

This review was conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Three databases (Pubmed, EMBASE, PSYCInfo) and Google scholar were searched for relevant articles from inception to 2 January 2019 based on Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes and Study designs (PICOS) framework. Key words, Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms, and Boolean operators (AND/OR) formed part of the search strategy. Articles were evaluated for quality and risks of bias.

RESULTS

Fourteen articles were included in the systematic review and five articles were selected for the meta-analysis. Based on the findings of the review and meta-analysis, two distinct areas were evident: the effect of DSF on blood glucose parameters and the effect of DSF on lipid profile. All fourteen studies included in the systematic review showed that DSF was effective in lowering blood glucose parameters in patients with type 2 diabetes compared with SF. The results of the meta-analysis confirmed the findings of the systematic review with respect to the fasting blood glucose, which was significantly lower (p = 0.01) in the DSF group compared to SF, with a mean difference of -1.15 (95% CI -2.07, -0.23) and glycated haemoglobin, which was significantly lower (p = 0.005) in the DSF group compared to the SF group following meta-analysis and sensitivity analysis. However, in relation to the sensitivity analysis for the fasting blood glucose, differences were not significant between the two groups when some of the studies were removed. Based on the systematic review, the outcomes of the studies selected to evaluate the effect of DSF on lipid profile were variable. Following the meta-analysis, no significant differences (p > 0.05) were found between the DSF and SF groups with respect to total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and triglyceride. The level of the HDL cholesterol was significantly higher (p = 0.04) in the DSF group compared to the SF group after the intervention, with a mean difference of 0.09 (95% CI, 0.00, 0.18), although this was not consistent based on the sensitivity analysis. The presence of low glycaemic index (GI) carbohydrate, the lower amount of carbohydrate and the higher protein, the presence of mono-unsaturated fatty acids and the different amounts and types of fibre in the DSF compared with SF may be responsible for the observed differences in cardiometabolic parameters in both groups.

CONCLUSION

The results provide evidence to suggest that DSF is effective in controlling fasting blood glucose and glycated haemoglobin and in increasing HDL cholesterol, but has no significant effect on other lipid parameters. However, our confidence in these findings would be increased by additional data from further studies.

Effect of Oral Nutritional Supplements with Sucromalt and Isomaltulose versus Standard Formula on Glycaemic Index, Entero-Insular Axis Peptides and Subjective Appetite in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomised Cross-Over Study

Oral diabetes-specific nutritional supplements (ONS-D) induce favourable postprandial responses in subjects with type 2 diabetes (DM2), but they have not been correlated yet with incretin release and subjective appetite (SA). This randomised, double-blind, cross-over study compared postprandial effects of ONS-D with isomaltulose and sucromalt versus standard formula (ET) on glycaemic index (GI), insulin, glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP), glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) and SA in 16 individuals with DM2. After overnight fasting, subjects consumed a portion of supplements containing 25 g of carbohydrates or reference food. Blood samples were collected at baseline and at 30, 60, 90, 120, 150 and 180 min; and SA sensations were assessed by a visual analogue scale on separate days. Glycaemic index values were low for ONS-D and intermediate for ET (p < 0.001). The insulin area under the curve (AUC0-180 min) (p < 0.02) and GIP AUC (p < 0.02) were lower after ONS-D and higher GLP-1 AUC when compared with ET (p < 0.05). Subjective appetite AUC was greater after ET than ONS-D (p < 0.05). Interactions between hormones, hunger, fullness and GI were found, but not within the ratings of SA; isomaltulose and sucromalt may have influenced these factors.

Practice Guidelines for Enteral Nutrition Management in Dysglycemic Critically Ill Patients: A Relook for Indian Scenario

Background and aim

Intensive-care practices and settings differ for India in comparison to other countries. While guidelines are available to direct the use of enteral nutrition (EN), there are no recommendations specific to nutritional management of EN in dysglycemic patients, specific to patients in Indian critical care settings. Advisory board meetings were arranged to develop the practice guidelines specific to the Indian context, for the use of EN in dysglycemic critically ill patients and to overcome challenges in this field.

Materials and methods

Two advisory board meetings were organized to review various existing guidelines, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), controlled trials and review articles, for their contextual relevance and strength. Three rounds of Delphi voting were done to arrive at consensus on certain recommendations. A systematic grading of practice guidelines by the advisory board was done based on strength of the consensus voting and reviewed supporting evidences.

Results

Based on the literature review, the recommendations for developing the practice guidelines were made as per the grading criteria agreed upon by the advisory board. The recommendations were to address challenges regarding prediction and assessment of dysglycemia (DG), acceptable glycemic targets in such settings, general nutritional aspects pertaining to DG nutrition, and nutrition in various superspecialty cases in critical care settings, where DG is commonly encountered.

Conclusion

This paper summarizes the optimum EN practices for managing DG in critically ill patients. The practical solutions to overcome the challenges in this field are presented as practice guidelines at the end of each section. These guidelines are expected to provide guidance for EN management in dysglycemic critically ill patients. These guidelines also outline the model glycemic control task force and its roles in nutrition care as well as an intensive care unit DG nutrition protocol.

How to cite this article

Mehta Y, Mithal A, Kulkarni A, Reddy BR, Sharma J, Dixit S, et al. Practice Guidelines for Enteral Nutrition Management in Dysglycemic Critically Ill Patients: A Relook for Indian Scenario. Indian J Crit Care Med 2019;23(12):594–603.

Tube Feeding with a Diabetes-Specific Enteral Formula Improves Glycemic Control in Severe Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients

BACKGROUND

Glycemic control is essential for managing acute stroke. This study evaluated the impact of a diabetes-specific formula (DSF) on glycemic control in severe acute ischemic stroke patients.

METHODS

A randomized, prospective controlled trial was conducted in Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital. Acute ischemic stroke patients who scored > 10 on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale as well as had swallowing problems were randomized to group A, which received a diabetes-specific enteral formula, and group B, which received a standard formula. Glycemic parameters were assessed at baseline and 7 days after admission.

RESULTS

One hundred four patients were enrolled in the study (group A, 53; group B, 51). Postprandial glucose parameters, including capillary glucose concentration from 8 hours to 16 hours after enteral nutrition (EN) consumption, incremental areas under the curve (iAUC_{0-16 h} ), peak value, and mean glucose concentration, were significantly lower in group A than in group B following a 7-day intervention period. Moreover, changes in HOMA_IR after the 7-day treatment were significantly higher in group A than in group B. No significant difference in the incidence of hypoglycemia, glycemic variability parameters, or nutrition parameters was found between the 2 groups, either at baseline or after treatment. There were no serious adverse events observed during the study.

CONCLUSION

A diabetes-specific formula may improve acute-term glycemic control in severe acute ischemic stroke patients.

Impact of Diabetes-Specific Nutritional Formulas versus Oatmeal on Postprandial Glucose, Insulin, GLP-1 and Postprandial Lipidemia

Diabetes-specific nutritional formulas (DSNFs) are frequently used as part of medical nutrition therapy for patients with diabetes. This study aims to evaluate postprandial (PP) effects of 2 DSNFs; Glucerna (GL) and Ultra Glucose Control (UGC) versus oatmeal (OM) on glucose, insulin, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), free fatty acids (FFA) and triglycerides (TG). After an overnight fast, 22 overweight/obese patients with type 2 diabetes were given 200 kcal of each of the three meals on three separate days in random order. Blood samples were collected at baseline and at 30, 60, 90, 120, 180 and 240 min. Glucose area under the curve (AUC_0–240) after GL and UGC was lower than OM (p < 0.001 for both). Insulin positive AUC_0–120 after UGC was higher than after OM (p = 0.02). GLP-1 AUC_0–120 and AUC_0–240 after GL and UGC was higher than after OM (p < 0.001 for both). FFA and TG levels were not different between meals. Intake of DSNFs improves PP glucose for 4 h in comparison to oatmeal of similar caloric level. This is achieved by either direct stimulation of insulin secretion or indirectly by stimulating GLP-1 secretion. The difference between their effects is probably related to their unique blends of amino acids, carbohydrates and fat.

Diabetes-specific enteral nutrition formula in hyperglycemic, mechanically ventilated, critically ill patients: a prospective, open-label, blind-randomized, multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

Although standard enteral nutrition is universally accepted, the use of disease-specific formulas for hyperglycemic patients is still controversial. This study examines whether a high-protein diabetes-specific formula reduces insulin needs, improves glycemic control and reduces ICU-acquired infection in critically ill, hyperglycemic patients on mechanical ventilation (MV).

METHODS

This was a prospective, open-label, randomized (web-based, blinded) study conducted at nine Spanish ICUs. The patient groups established according to the high-protein formula received were: group A, new-generation diabetes-specific formula; group B, standard control formula; group C, control diabetes-specific formula. Inclusion criteria were: expected enteral nutrition ≥5 days, MV, baseline glucose >126 mg/dL on admission or >200 mg/dL in the first 48 h. Exclusion criteria were: APACHE II ≤10, insulin-dependent diabetes, renal or hepatic failure, treatment with corticosteroids, immunosuppressants or lipid-lowering drugs and body mass index ≥40 kg/m(2). The targeted glucose level was 110-150 mg/dL. Glycemic variability was calculated as the standard deviation, glycemic lability index and coefficient of variation. Acquired infections were recorded using published consensus criteria for critically ill patients. Data analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS

Over a 2-year period, 157 patients were consecutively enrolled (A 52, B 53 and C 52). Compared with the standard control formula, the new formula gave rise to lower insulin requirement (19.1 ± 13.1 vs. 23.7 ± 40.1 IU/day, p <0.05), plasma glucose (138.6 ± 39.1 vs. 146.1 ± 49.9 mg/dL, p <0.01) and capillary blood glucose (146.1 ± 45.8 vs. 155.3 ± 63.6 mg/dL, p <0.001). Compared with the control diabetes-specific formula, only capillary glucose levels were significantly reduced (146.1 ± 45.8 vs. 150.1 ± 41.9, p <0.01). Both specific formulas reduced capillary glucose on ICU day 1 (p <0.01), glucose variability in the first week (p <0.05), and incidences of ventilator-associated tracheobronchitis (p <0.01) or pneumonia (p <0.05) compared with the standard formula. No effects of the nutrition formula were produced on hospital stay or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In these high-risk ICU patients, both diabetes-specific formulas lowered insulin requirements, improved glycemic control and reduced the risk of acquired infections relative to the standard formula. Compared with the control-specific formula, the new-generation formula also improved capillary glycemia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT1233726 .

Evaluation of the role of enteral nutrition in managing patients with diabetes: a systematic review

The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the role of enteral nutrition in managing patients with diabetes on enteral feed. The prevalence of diabetes is on the increase in the UK and globally partly due to lack of physical activities, poor dietary regimes and genetic susceptibility. The development of diabetes often leads to complications such as stroke, which may require enteral nutritional support. The provision of enteral feeds comes with its complications including hyperglycaemia which if not managed can have profound consequences for the patients in terms of clinical outcomes. Therefore, it is essential to develop strategies for managing patients with diabetes on enteral feed with respect to the type and composition of the feed. This is a systematic review of published peer reviewed articles. EBSCOhost Research, PubMed and SwetsWise databases were searched. Reference lists of identified articles were reviewed. Randomised controlled trials comparing enteral nutrition diabetes specific formulas with standard formulas were included. The studies which compared diabetes specific formulas (DSF) with standard formulas showed that DSF was more effective in controlling glucose profiles including postprandial glucose, HbA1c and insulinemic response. The use of DSF appears to be effective in managing patients with diabetes on enteral feed compared with standard feed.

Differences in resource utilization between patients with diabetes receiving glycemia-targeted specialized nutrition vs standard nutrition formulas in U.S. hospitals

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of the study was to compare patient outcomes and costs for patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) receiving glycemia-targeted specialized nutrition (GTSN) with similar patients receiving standard nutrition (STDN) formulas during acute care hospitalizations.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The study was designed as a retrospective analysis over a 10-year period (2000-2009) of clinical and cost data from 125,000 hospital inpatient episodes in the Premier Research Database. Patients received either GTSN or STDN, by tube or orally, as a component of comprehensive care for hyperglycemia in patients with DM. To adjust for potential cohort imbalances, GTSN patients were matched with STDN patients on the basis of propensity scores, adjusting for many characteristics, including age, sex, race, All Patient Refined Diagnosis-Related Group (APR-DRG) illness severity, APR-DRG mortality risk, and comorbidities.

RESULTS

Tube-fed patients with DM who were provided GTSN had a 0.88-day (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-1.02) shorter length of hospital stay (LOS) on average compared with those patients provided STDN. Orally fed patients with DM who were provided GTSN had a 0.17-day (95% CI, 0.14-0.21) shorter LOS than did those patients provided STDN. The shorter LOS associated with GTSN contributed to a cost savings of $2586 for tube-fed patients and $1356 for orally fed patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of GTSN feeding formulas for patients with DM in acute care hospital settings was associated with reduced LOS and inpatient hospital episode cost in comparison to STDN.

Inpatient enteral and parenteral [corrected] nutrition for patients with diabetes

Both glycemic control and adequate nutrition support impact the clinical outcome of hospitalized patients. Providing nutrition to malnourished patients using the enteral or parenteral route may increase the risk of hyperglycemia, especially in patients with diabetes. Hyperglycemia can be managed through the use of enteral tube feeds with reduced carbohydrate content or limiting the carbohydrate concentration in parenteral formulas. Judicious use of insulin or other glucose-lowering medications synchronized with appropriate nutrition support allows for optimal inpatient glycemic control.

A diabetes-specific enteral formula improves glycemic variability in patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Well-controlled studies have demonstrated that inpatient hyperglycemia is an indicator of poor clinical outcomes, but the use of diabetes-specific enteral formulas in hospitalized patients remains a topic of great debate.

METHODS

In two different protocols, postprandial glycemia and insulinemia were measured in 22 subjects with diabetes fed a diabetes-specific or standard formula (protocol 1). Continuous glucose monitoring was used to assess glucose levels in 12 enterally fed patients with diabetes receiving the standard formula followed by the diabetes-specific formula continuously for 5 days each (protocol 2). End points included postprandial glycemia and insulinemia, glycemic variability (mean amplitude of glycemic excursions [MAGE]), mean glucose, and insulin use.

RESULTS

In the postprandial response protocol, the diabetes-specific formula resulted in lower positive areas under the postprandial curve (P < 0.001) and peak glucose (P < 0.001) and insulin (P = 0.017) levels. In the protocol using continuous glucose monitoring, glycemic variability (as measured by MAGE) was lower with continuous administration of the diabetes-specific than the standard formula (64.6 +/- 6.8 mg/dL vs. 110.6 +/-15.3 mg/dL, P = 0.003). Also, administration of the diabetes-specific formula resulted in lower mean glucose concentrations during feeding (171.1 +/- 16.1 vs. 202.1 +/- 17.4 mg/dL, P = 0.024) and insulin requirements (7.8 +/- 2.3 vs. 10.9 +/- 3.3 units/day, P = 0.039) than the standard formula.

CONCLUSIONS

Relative to the standard formula, the diabetes-specific formula reduced postprandial glycemia, mean glucose, glycemic variability, and short-acting insulin requirements. These results suggest potential clinical usefulness of a diabetes-specific enteral formula for minimizing glycemic excursions in hospitalized patients.