Type 2 diabetes subgroups and response to glucose-lowering therapy: Results from the EDICT and Qatar studies

AIM

To examine the efficacy of glucose-lowering medications in subgroups of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Cluster analysis was performed in participants in the Efficacy and Durability of Initial Combination Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes (EDICT) study and the Qatar study using age, body mass index (BMI), glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), and homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and beta-cell function (HOMA-β). Participants also underwent an oral glucose tolerance test with measurement of plasma glucose, insulin and C-peptide concentrations to derive independent measures of insulin secretion and insulin sensitivity. The response to glucose-lowering therapies (change in HbA1c) was measured in each participant cluster for 3 years.

RESULTS

Three distinct and comparable clusters/groups of T2DM patients were identified in both the EDICT and Qatar studies. Participants in Group 1 had the highest HbA1c and manifested severe insulin deficiency. Participants in Group 3 had comparable insulin sensitivity to those in Group 1 but better beta-cell function and better glucose control. Participants in Group 2 had the highest BMI with severe insulin resistance accompanied by marked hyperinsulinaemia, which was primarily attributable to decreased insulin clearance. Unexpectedly, participants in Group 1 had better response to combination therapy with pioglitazone plus exenatide than with insulin therapy or metformin sequentially followed by glipizide and basal insulin, while participants in Group 2 responded equally well to both therapies despite very severe insulin resistance.

CONCLUSION

Distinct metabolic phenotypes characterize different T2DM clusters and differential responses to glucose-lowering therapies. Participants with severe insulin deficiency respond better to agents that preserve beta-cell function, while, surprisingly, patients with severe insulin resistance did not respond favourably to insulin sensitizers.

Assessment of tracheal intubating conditions in children using remifentanil and propofol without muscle relaxant

BACKGROUND

Tracheal intubation in children can be achieved by deep inhalational anaesthesia or an intravenous anaesthetic and a muscle relaxant, suxamethonium being widely used despite several side-effects. Studies have shown that oral intubation can be facilitated safely and effectively in children after induction of anaesthesia with propofol and alfentanil without a muscle relaxant. Remifentanil is a new, ultra-short acting, selective mu-receptor agonist that is 20-30 times more potent than alfentanil. This clinical study was designed to assess whether combination of propofol and remifentanil could be used without a muscle relaxant to facilitate tracheal intubation in children.

METHODS

Forty children (5-10 years) admitted for adenotonsillectomy were randomly allocated to one of two groups to receive remifentanil 2 microg.kg(-1) (Gp I) or remifentanil 3 microg.kg(-1) (Gp II) before the induction of anaesthesia with i.v. propofol 3 mg.kg(-1). No neuromuscular blocking agent was administered. Intubating conditions were assessed using a four-point scoring system based on ease of laryngoscopy, jaw relaxation, position of vocal cords, degree of coughing and limb movement. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) measured noninvasively before induction of anaesthesia to 5 min after intubation (seven time points).

RESULTS

Tracheal intubation was successful in all patients without requiring neuromuscular blocking agent. Intubating conditions were clinically acceptable in 10 of 20 patients (50%) in Gp I compared with 18 of 20 patients (90%) in Gp II (P < 0.05). MAP and HR decreased in both groups after induction of anaesthesia (P < 0.01). Both HR and MAP were significantly lower in Gp II compared with Gp I after tracheal intubation (P < 0.01). No patient in the present study developed bradycardia or hypotension.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that remifentanil (3 microg.kg(-1)), administered before propofol (3 mg.kg(-1)) provides acceptable tracheal intubating conditions in children, and completely inhibited the increase in HR and MAP associated with intubation.