Excellent Glycemic Control Maintained by Open-Source Hybrid Closed-Loop AndroidAPS During and After Sustained Physical Activity

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11110%2F18%3A10381331" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11110/18:10381331 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216208:11130/18:10381331 RIV/00064203:_____/18:10381331

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2018.0214" target="_blank" >https://doi.org/10.1089/dia.2018.0214</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/dia.2018.0214" target="_blank" >10.1089/dia.2018.0214</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Excellent Glycemic Control Maintained by Open-Source Hybrid Closed-Loop AndroidAPS During and After Sustained Physical Activity

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Objective: Officially licensed hybrid closed-loop systems are not currently available worldwide; therefore, open-source systems have become increasingly popular. Our aim was to assess the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of an open-source hybrid closed-loop system (AndroidAPS) versus SmartGuard((R)) technology for day-and-night glucose control in children under extreme sports conditions. Research Design and Methods: Twenty-two children (16 girls, 6-15 years of age, median HbA1c 569mmol/mol) were enrolled in this pivotal winter sports camp study. The participants were divided into two groups using either the AndroidAPS or SmartGuard technology. Physical exertion was represented by all-day alpine skiing. The primary endpoints were mean glucose level, time below the threshold of 3.9mmol/L, and time within the target range of 3.9 to 10mmol/L. Results: The children using the AndroidAPS had significantly lower mean glycemia levels (7.2 +/- 2.7 vs. 7.7 +/- 2.8mmol/L; 129.6 +/- 49 vs. 138.6 +/- 50mg/dL, P&lt;0.042) than the children using the SmartGuard. The proportion of time below the target (median 5.0%+/- 2.5% vs. 3.0%+/- 2.3%, P=0.6) and in the target zone (63%+/- 9.5% vs. 63%+/- 18%, P=0.5) did not significantly differ. The AndroidAPS group experienced more frequent malfunctions of the cannula set (median 0.8 +/- 0.4 vs. 0.2 +/- 0.4, P=0.02), which could have affected the results. No significant difference was found in the amount of carbohydrates consumed for the prevention and treatment of hypoglycemia [median 40 +/- 23 vs. 25 +/- 29g/(patient &lt;bold&gt;&lt;/bold&gt;3 days)]. No episodes of severe hypoglycemia or other serious adverse events were noted. Conclusions: This pilot study showed that the AndroidAPS system was a safe and feasible alternative to the SmartGuard Technology.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Excellent Glycemic Control Maintained by Open-Source Hybrid Closed-Loop AndroidAPS During and After Sustained Physical Activity

Popis výsledku anglicky

Objective: Officially licensed hybrid closed-loop systems are not currently available worldwide; therefore, open-source systems have become increasingly popular. Our aim was to assess the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of an open-source hybrid closed-loop system (AndroidAPS) versus SmartGuard((R)) technology for day-and-night glucose control in children under extreme sports conditions. Research Design and Methods: Twenty-two children (16 girls, 6-15 years of age, median HbA1c 569mmol/mol) were enrolled in this pivotal winter sports camp study. The participants were divided into two groups using either the AndroidAPS or SmartGuard technology. Physical exertion was represented by all-day alpine skiing. The primary endpoints were mean glucose level, time below the threshold of 3.9mmol/L, and time within the target range of 3.9 to 10mmol/L. Results: The children using the AndroidAPS had significantly lower mean glycemia levels (7.2 +/- 2.7 vs. 7.7 +/- 2.8mmol/L; 129.6 +/- 49 vs. 138.6 +/- 50mg/dL, P&lt;0.042) than the children using the SmartGuard. The proportion of time below the target (median 5.0%+/- 2.5% vs. 3.0%+/- 2.3%, P=0.6) and in the target zone (63%+/- 9.5% vs. 63%+/- 18%, P=0.5) did not significantly differ. The AndroidAPS group experienced more frequent malfunctions of the cannula set (median 0.8 +/- 0.4 vs. 0.2 +/- 0.4, P=0.02), which could have affected the results. No significant difference was found in the amount of carbohydrates consumed for the prevention and treatment of hypoglycemia [median 40 +/- 23 vs. 25 +/- 29g/(patient &lt;bold&gt;&lt;/bold&gt;3 days)]. No episodes of severe hypoglycemia or other serious adverse events were noted. Conclusions: This pilot study showed that the AndroidAPS system was a safe and feasible alternative to the SmartGuard Technology.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30202 - Endocrinology and metabolism (including diabetes, hormones)

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2018

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Diabetes Technology &amp; Therapeutics

ISSN

1520-9156

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

neuveden

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

October

Stát vydavatele periodika

US - Spojené státy americké

Počet stran výsledku

7

Strana od-do

—

Kód UT WoS článku

000446458100001

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85055854919