RT‐CGM in conjunction with CSII vs MDI in optimizing glycaemic control in T1DM: Systemic review and meta‐analysis

Abstract Introduction To determine the impact of real‐time continuous glucose monitoring (RT‐CGM) in conjunction with ‘Open loop’‐ continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) as compared to conventional multiple daily injections (MDI) in type 1 diabetes. Methods We explored the COCHRANE database...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jimmy William, Jane McCluskey, Nigel Gleeson
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2022-03-01
Series:Endocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/edm2.324
_version_ 1819123330988376064
author Jimmy William
Jane McCluskey
Nigel Gleeson
author_facet Jimmy William
Jane McCluskey
Nigel Gleeson
author_sort Jimmy William
collection DOAJ
description Abstract Introduction To determine the impact of real‐time continuous glucose monitoring (RT‐CGM) in conjunction with ‘Open loop’‐ continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) as compared to conventional multiple daily injections (MDI) in type 1 diabetes. Methods We explored the COCHRANE database, MEDLINE, WEB OF SCIENCE, GOOGLE SCHOLARS, PUBMED, EMBASE, and cited literature in articles retrieved (2010–2021) for all randomized controlled trials and real‐world trials of more than 6 months duration in patients with type 1 diabetes that compared RT‐CGM+CSII vs RT‐ CGM+MDI. A total of 1645 publications have been identified; however, only 3 trials fulfilled our inclusion criteria with a total number of 150 patients (72 patients using RT‐CGM+CSII and 78 patients on RT‐CGM+MDI). A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis were carried out. Results No statistically significant reduction in HbA1c was found on comparing RT‐CGM+CSII vs RT‐ CGM + MDI, with p‐value = .75. Likewise, impact on TIR, weight and insulin usage was found to be statistically insignificant with p‐value of 0.15, 0.75 and 0.20 respectively. There was an overall homogeneity between the 3 trials in respect to all previous variables with I2 being 0%. Conclusions Real‐time continuous glucose monitors in conjunction with MDI open‐loop CSII had a similar impact on HbA1c, weight, insulin usage and TIR. In addition, RT‐CGM when combined with CSII was associated with higher costs and reduced quality of life, hence RT‐ CGM+MDI can be considered as a cheaper, safer yet equivalent substitute. Review Registration This study was registered in PROSPERO (International prospective register of systematic reviews). Registration Name: RT‐CGM in conjunction with CSII vs MDI in optimizing glycaemic control in T1DM: a systematic review. Registration No: CRD42021255333. Accessible at: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021255333. Amendments: Few amendments to the above‐mentioned registration were made: (1) Title (Meta‐analysis was added). (2) Prof. Gleeson was added as an author. (3) Real‐world trials were included. (4) Outcomes required in studies as per our inclusion criteria amended to include at least 1 outcome. (5) Bias risk was assessed by the CASP tool.
first_indexed 2024-12-22T07:06:39Z
format Article
id doaj.art-26c4d701a14f4b08b1705e7d568942ff
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2398-9238
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-22T07:06:39Z
publishDate 2022-03-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Endocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism
spelling doaj.art-26c4d701a14f4b08b1705e7d568942ff2022-12-21T18:34:39ZengWileyEndocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism2398-92382022-03-0152n/an/a10.1002/edm2.324RT‐CGM in conjunction with CSII vs MDI in optimizing glycaemic control in T1DM: Systemic review and meta‐analysisJimmy William0Jane McCluskey1Nigel Gleeson2Sligo University Hospital – Haematology Department Sligo IrelandQueen Margaret University Queen Margaret University Way Musselburgh UKQueen Margaret University Queen Margaret University Way Musselburgh UKAbstract Introduction To determine the impact of real‐time continuous glucose monitoring (RT‐CGM) in conjunction with ‘Open loop’‐ continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) as compared to conventional multiple daily injections (MDI) in type 1 diabetes. Methods We explored the COCHRANE database, MEDLINE, WEB OF SCIENCE, GOOGLE SCHOLARS, PUBMED, EMBASE, and cited literature in articles retrieved (2010–2021) for all randomized controlled trials and real‐world trials of more than 6 months duration in patients with type 1 diabetes that compared RT‐CGM+CSII vs RT‐ CGM+MDI. A total of 1645 publications have been identified; however, only 3 trials fulfilled our inclusion criteria with a total number of 150 patients (72 patients using RT‐CGM+CSII and 78 patients on RT‐CGM+MDI). A Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis were carried out. Results No statistically significant reduction in HbA1c was found on comparing RT‐CGM+CSII vs RT‐ CGM + MDI, with p‐value = .75. Likewise, impact on TIR, weight and insulin usage was found to be statistically insignificant with p‐value of 0.15, 0.75 and 0.20 respectively. There was an overall homogeneity between the 3 trials in respect to all previous variables with I2 being 0%. Conclusions Real‐time continuous glucose monitors in conjunction with MDI open‐loop CSII had a similar impact on HbA1c, weight, insulin usage and TIR. In addition, RT‐CGM when combined with CSII was associated with higher costs and reduced quality of life, hence RT‐ CGM+MDI can be considered as a cheaper, safer yet equivalent substitute. Review Registration This study was registered in PROSPERO (International prospective register of systematic reviews). Registration Name: RT‐CGM in conjunction with CSII vs MDI in optimizing glycaemic control in T1DM: a systematic review. Registration No: CRD42021255333. Accessible at: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021255333. Amendments: Few amendments to the above‐mentioned registration were made: (1) Title (Meta‐analysis was added). (2) Prof. Gleeson was added as an author. (3) Real‐world trials were included. (4) Outcomes required in studies as per our inclusion criteria amended to include at least 1 outcome. (5) Bias risk was assessed by the CASP tool.https://doi.org/10.1002/edm2.324continuous glucose monitoringcontinuous subcutaneous insulin infusionsglycaemic controlmultiple daily injectionstype 1 diabetes
spellingShingle Jimmy William
Jane McCluskey
Nigel Gleeson
RT‐CGM in conjunction with CSII vs MDI in optimizing glycaemic control in T1DM: Systemic review and meta‐analysis
Endocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism
continuous glucose monitoring
continuous subcutaneous insulin infusions
glycaemic control
multiple daily injections
type 1 diabetes
title RT‐CGM in conjunction with CSII vs MDI in optimizing glycaemic control in T1DM: Systemic review and meta‐analysis
title_full RT‐CGM in conjunction with CSII vs MDI in optimizing glycaemic control in T1DM: Systemic review and meta‐analysis
title_fullStr RT‐CGM in conjunction with CSII vs MDI in optimizing glycaemic control in T1DM: Systemic review and meta‐analysis
title_full_unstemmed RT‐CGM in conjunction with CSII vs MDI in optimizing glycaemic control in T1DM: Systemic review and meta‐analysis
title_short RT‐CGM in conjunction with CSII vs MDI in optimizing glycaemic control in T1DM: Systemic review and meta‐analysis
title_sort rt cgm in conjunction with csii vs mdi in optimizing glycaemic control in t1dm systemic review and meta analysis
topic continuous glucose monitoring
continuous subcutaneous insulin infusions
glycaemic control
multiple daily injections
type 1 diabetes
url https://doi.org/10.1002/edm2.324
work_keys_str_mv AT jimmywilliam rtcgminconjunctionwithcsiivsmdiinoptimizingglycaemiccontrolint1dmsystemicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT janemccluskey rtcgminconjunctionwithcsiivsmdiinoptimizingglycaemiccontrolint1dmsystemicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT nigelgleeson rtcgminconjunctionwithcsiivsmdiinoptimizingglycaemiccontrolint1dmsystemicreviewandmetaanalysis