BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) is an effective treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Tight glycaemic control immediately after RYGB for T2DM may improve long-term glycaemic outcomes, but is also associated with a higher risk of hypoglycaemia. We designed a treatment algorithm to achieve optimal glycaemic control in patients with insulin-treated T2DM after RYGB and evaluated its feasibility, safety and efficacy. METHODS: Fifty patients following protocol-driven diabetes management were discharged on a fixed amount of metformin and glargine, with the insulin dose adjusted according to a standardised insulin sliding scale aiming for a fasting capillary glucose (FCG) of 5.5-6.9 mmol/L. Glycaemic outcome and remission of diabetes (defined as HbA1c < 6% and FCG levels < 5.6 mmol/L for at least 1 year without hypoglycaemic medication) were compared between patients who received protocol-driven treatment and a similar cohort of 49 patients following standard glycaemic management. RESULTS: At 1 year follow-up, the protocol-driven group showed a greater improvement in glycaemic control than the non-protocol-driven group (HbA1c -3.0 ± 0.2% vs. -1.2 ± 0.1%, P < 0.001; FCG levels -3.4 ± 0.2 vs. -2.0 ± 0.2 mmol/L, P = 0.02) and a higher remission rate from T2DM (50.0% vs. 6.1%, P < 0.001). No symptomatic hypoglycaemia was reported in either group. CONCLUSIONS: The protocol-driven management proved to be feasible, safe and effective in achieving targeted glycaemic control in T2DM after RYGB. The next step will be to scrutinise the efficacy of protocol-driven management in a randomised controlled clinical trial.
BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (RYGB) is an effective treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Tight glycaemic control immediately after RYGB for T2DM may improve long-term glycaemic outcomes, but is also associated with a higher risk of hypoglycaemia. We designed a treatment algorithm to achieve optimal glycaemic control in patients with insulin-treated T2DM after RYGB and evaluated its feasibility, safety and efficacy. METHODS: Fifty patients following protocol-driven diabetes management were discharged on a fixed amount of metformin and glargine, with the insulin dose adjusted according to a standardised insulin sliding scale aiming for a fasting capillary glucose (FCG) of 5.5-6.9 mmol/L. Glycaemic outcome and remission of diabetes (defined as HbA1c < 6% and FCG levels < 5.6 mmol/L for at least 1 year without hypoglycaemic medication) were compared between patients who received protocol-driven treatment and a similar cohort of 49 patients following standard glycaemic management. RESULTS: At 1 year follow-up, the protocol-driven group showed a greater improvement in glycaemic control than the non-protocol-driven group (HbA1c -3.0 ± 0.2% vs. -1.2 ± 0.1%, P < 0.001; FCG levels -3.4 ± 0.2 vs. -2.0 ± 0.2 mmol/L, P = 0.02) and a higher remission rate from T2DM (50.0% vs. 6.1%, P < 0.001). No symptomatic hypoglycaemia was reported in either group. CONCLUSIONS: The protocol-driven management proved to be feasible, safe and effective in achieving targeted glycaemic control in T2DM after RYGB. The next step will be to scrutinise the efficacy of protocol-driven management in a randomised controlled clinical trial.
Authors: Lars Sjöström; Anna-Karin Lindroos; Markku Peltonen; Jarl Torgerson; Claude Bouchard; Björn Carlsson; Sven Dahlgren; Bo Larsson; Kristina Narbro; Carl David Sjöström; Marianne Sullivan; Hans Wedel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-12-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Nicola Scopinaro; Giovanni F Adami; Francesco S Papadia; Giovanni Camerini; Flavia Carlini; Martin Fried; Lucia Briatore; Gabriele D'Alessandro; Gabriella Andraghetti; Renzo Cordera Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Rury R Holman; Sanjoy K Paul; M Angelyn Bethel; H Andrew W Neil; David R Matthews Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-09-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: William Duckworth; Carlos Abraira; Thomas Moritz; Domenic Reda; Nicholas Emanuele; Peter D Reaven; Franklin J Zieve; Jennifer Marks; Stephen N Davis; Rodney Hayward; Stuart R Warren; Steven Goldman; Madeline McCarren; Mary Ellen Vitek; William G Henderson; Grant D Huang Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-12-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Hertzel C Gerstein; Michael E Miller; Robert P Byington; David C Goff; J Thomas Bigger; John B Buse; William C Cushman; Saul Genuth; Faramarz Ismail-Beigi; Richard H Grimm; Jeffrey L Probstfield; Denise G Simons-Morton; William T Friedewald Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-06-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: W J Pories; M S Swanson; K G MacDonald; S B Long; P G Morris; B M Brown; H A Barakat; R A deRamon; G Israel; J M Dolezal Journal: Ann Surg Date: 1995-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Adam M Tritsch; Christopher M Bland; Christos Hatzigeorgiou; Lori B Sweeney; Michael Phillips Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2015-04 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Erik Stenberg; Luiz Fernando Dos Reis Falcão; Mary O'Kane; Ronald Liem; Dimitri J Pournaras; Paulina Salminen; Richard D Urman; Anupama Wadhwa; Ulf O Gustafsson; Anders Thorell Journal: World J Surg Date: 2022-01-04 Impact factor: 3.352