Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
John Pickup a Department of Chemical Pathology, Metabolic Unit,
Guy's, King's, and St Thomas's Hospitals School of Medicine,
Guy's Hospital, London SE1 9RT, b South
West Thames Institute for Renal Research, St Helier Hospital,
Carshalton, Surrey SM5 1AA, c Department of General Practice and Primary
Care, St George's Hospital Medical School, London SW17 0RE
Correspondence to: J Pickup john.pickup{at}kcl.ac.uk
Objective:
To compare glycaemic control and insulin
dosage in people with type 1 diabetes treated by continuous
subcutaneous insulin infusion (insulin infusion pump therapy) or
optimised insulin injections.
What is already known on this topic
Control of blood glucose concentration is substantially better on pump
therapy than conventional (non-optimised) injection therapy It is unclear how glycaemic control on pump therapy compares with
modern optimised insulin injection regimens What this study adds
Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion is an effective form of
intensive insulin therapy that should lower the risk of microvascular
complications Insulin pump therapy is unnecessary for most people with type 1 diabetes and should be reserved for those with special problems with
optimised insulin injections
Design:
Meta-analysis of 12 randomised controlled trials.
Participants:
301 people with type 1 diabetes
allocated to insulin infusion and 299 allocated to insulin injections
for between 2.5 and 24 months.
Main outcome measures:
Glycaemic control measured by
mean blood glucose concentration and percentage of glycated
haemoglobin. Total daily insulin dose.
Results:
Mean blood glucose concentration was lower in people receiving continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion compared with those receiving insulin injections (standardised mean difference 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.35 to 0.77), equivalent to a
difference of 1.0 mmol/l. The percentage of glycated haemoglobin was
also lower in people receiving insulin infusion (0.44, 0.20 to 0.69), equivalent to a difference of 0.51%. Blood glucose concentrations were
less variable during insulin infusion. This improved control during
insulin infusion was achieved with an average reduction of 14% in
insulin dose (difference in total daily insulin dose 0.58, 0.34 to
0.83), equivalent to 7.58 units/day.
Conclusions:
Glycaemic control is better during
continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion compared with optimised
injection therapy, and less insulin is needed to achieve this level of
strict control. The difference in control between the two methods is small but should reduce the risk of microvascular complications.
Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (insulin pump therapy)
produces good long term control of blood glucose concentrations in
people with type 1 diabetes
Though glycaemic control was better during continuous subcutaneous
insulin infusion than optimised insulin injection therapy, the
difference was relatively small
Read all Rapid Responses