Literature DB >> 25600304

Multicenter outpatient dinner/overnight reduction of hypoglycemia and increased time of glucose in target with a wearable artificial pancreas using modular model predictive control in adults with type 1 diabetes.

S Del Favero1, J Place, J Kropff, M Messori, P Keith-Hynes, R Visentin, M Monaro, S Galasso, F Boscari, C Toffanin, F Di Palma, G Lanzola, S Scarpellini, A Farret, B Kovatchev, A Avogaro, D Bruttomesso, L Magni, J H DeVries, C Cobelli, E Renard.   

Abstract

AIMS: To test in an outpatient setting the safety and efficacy of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) driven by a modular model predictive control (MMPC) algorithm informed by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) measurement.
METHODS: 13 patients affected by type 1 diabetes participated to a non-randomized outpatient 42-h experiment that included two evening meals and overnight periods (in short, dinner & night periods). CSII was patient-driven during dinner & night period 1 and MMPC-driven during dinner&night period 2. The study was conducted in hotels, where patients could move around freely. A CGM system (G4 Platinum; Dexcom Inc., San Diego, CA, USA) and insulin pump (AccuChek Combo; Roche Diagnostics, Mannheim, Germany) were connected wirelessly to a smartphone-based platform (DiAs, Diabetes Assistant; University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA) during both periods.
RESULTS: A significantly lower percentage of time spent with glucose levels <3.9 mmol/l was achieved in period 2 compared with period 1: 1.96 ± 4.56% vs 12.76 ± 15.84% (mean ± standard deviation, p < 0.01), together with a greater percentage of time spent in the 3.9-10 mmol/l target range: 83.56 ± 14.02% vs 62.43 ± 29.03% (p = 0.04). In addition, restricting the analysis to the overnight phases, a lower percentage of time spent with glucose levels <3.9 mmol/l (1.92 ± 4.89% vs 12.7 ± 19.75%; p = 0.03) was combined with a greater percentage of time spent in 3.9-10 mmol/l target range in period 2 compared with period 1 (92.16 ± 8.03% vs 63.97 ± 2.73%; p = 0.01). Average glucose levels were similar during both periods.
CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that MMPC managed by a wearable system is safe and effective during evening meal and overnight. Its sustained use during this period is currently being tested in an ongoing randomized 2-month study.
© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Artificial Pancreas; Clinical Trial; Closed-Loop; Glycaemic Control; Insulin Delivery; Outpatient; Technology and Diabetes; Type 1 Diabetes

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25600304     DOI: 10.1111/dom.12440

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Obes Metab        ISSN: 1462-8902            Impact factor:   6.577


  30 in total

Review 1.  AP@home: The Artificial Pancreas Is Now at Home.

Authors:  Lutz Heinemann; Carsten Benesch; J Hans DeVries
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2016-06-28

2.  Designing an artificial pancreas architecture: the AP@home experience.

Authors:  Giordano Lanzola; Chiara Toffanin; Federico Di Palma; Simone Del Favero; Lalo Magni; Riccardo Bellazzi
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2014-11-28       Impact factor: 2.602

3.  An Enhanced Model Predictive Control for the Artificial Pancreas Using a Confidence Index Based on Residual Analysis of Past Predictions.

Authors:  Alejandro J Laguna Sanz; Francis J Doyle; Eyal Dassau
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2016-12-01

4.  Successful At-Home Use of the Tandem Control-IQ Artificial Pancreas System in Young Children During a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Gregory P Forlenza; Laya Ekhlaspour; Marc Breton; David M Maahs; R Paul Wadwa; Mark DeBoer; Laurel H Messer; Marissa Town; Jennifer Pinnata; Geoff Kruse; Bruce A Buckingham; Daniel Cherñavvsky
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2019-03-19       Impact factor: 6.118

Review 5.  A Review of Emerging Technologies for the Management of Diabetes Mellitus.

Authors:  Konstantia Zarkogianni; Eleni Litsa; Konstantinos Mitsis; Po-Yen Wu; Chanchala D Kaddi; Chih-Wen Cheng; May D Wang; Konstantina S Nikita
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 4.538

Review 6.  Multivariable Adaptive Artificial Pancreas System in Type 1 Diabetes.

Authors:  Ali Cinar
Journal:  Curr Diab Rep       Date:  2017-08-15       Impact factor: 4.810

7.  The International Diabetes Closed-Loop Study: Testing Artificial Pancreas Component Interoperability.

Authors:  Stacey M Anderson; Eyal Dassau; Dan Raghinaru; John Lum; Sue A Brown; Jordan E Pinsker; Mei Mei Church; Carol Levy; David Lam; Yogish C Kudva; Bruce Buckingham; Gregory P Forlenza; R Paul Wadwa; Lori Laffel; Francis J Doyle; J Hans DeVries; Eric Renard; Claudio Cobelli; Federico Boscari; Simone Del Favero; Boris P Kovatchev
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2019-01-16       Impact factor: 6.118

Review 8.  A critical review and analysis of ethical issues associated with the artificial pancreas.

Authors:  A Quintal; V Messier; R Rabasa-Lhoret; E Racine
Journal:  Diabetes Metab       Date:  2018-04-25       Impact factor: 6.041

9.  Multinational Home Use of Closed-Loop Control Is Safe and Effective.

Authors:  Stacey M Anderson; Dan Raghinaru; Jordan E Pinsker; Federico Boscari; Eric Renard; Bruce A Buckingham; Revital Nimri; Francis J Doyle; Sue A Brown; Patrick Keith-Hynes; Marc D Breton; Daniel Chernavvsky; Wendy C Bevier; Paige K Bradley; Daniela Bruttomesso; Simone Del Favero; Roberta Calore; Claudio Cobelli; Angelo Avogaro; Anne Farret; Jerome Place; Trang T Ly; Satya Shanmugham; Moshe Phillip; Eyal Dassau; Isuru S Dasanayake; Craig Kollman; John W Lum; Roy W Beck; Boris Kovatchev
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2016-04-13       Impact factor: 19.112

10.  Psychosocial Impact of the Bionic Pancreas During Summer Camp.

Authors:  Jill Weissberg-Benchell; Danielle Hessler; William H Polonsky; Lawrence Fisher
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2016-06-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.