4.4 Article

Combined bedtime insulin -: daytime sulphonylurea regimen compared with two different daily insulin regimens in type 2 diabetes:: effects on HbA1c and hypoglycaemia rate -: a randomised trial

期刊

DIABETES-METABOLISM RESEARCH AND REVIEWS
卷 19, 期 2, 页码 148-152

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/dmrr.356

关键词

type 2 diabetes mellitus; hypoglycaemic events; insulin regimens; secondary failure; oral hypoglycaemic agents; glimepiride

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Several efficacy studies of insulin-therapy regimens in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus have shown varying results. Moreover, most studies did not address hypoglycaemia frequency and severity. Methods In this multicentre study, we compared the glycaemic efficacy and incidence rate of hypoglycaemic episodes between 3 treatment regimens in obese type 2 diabetic patients with secondary failure to sulphonylurea and metformin. During the run-in phase, patients were treated with glimepiride and metformin. After 3 months, 261 patients with HbA(1c) values >6.5% were randomised to (A) glimepiride + Neutral Protein Hagedorn (NPH) insulin at bedtime, (B) NPH insulin twice daily and (C) 30/70 mixture of short-acting and NPH insulin twice daily. The therapeutic aim was an HbA(1c) level less than or equal to6.5%. Results Mean HbA(1c) achieved at 9 months was significantly higher in group A: 8.9% versus 8.3% and 8.4% in groups B and C, respectively (P < 0.001). There was no difference in the mild hypoglycaemic event rate, 0.36 versus 0.48 versus 0.53 events per patient month, in groups A, B and C, respectively. Severe hypoglycaemic events, requiring help from others, did not occur throughout the study. The mean weight gain and insulin dose were comparable in all three groups. Conclusions The glimepiride + NPH insulin treatment resulted in a higher HbA(1c) level, as compared to the other regimens. In the clinical setting of this multicentre study, good glycaemic control was only achieved in a minority of the patients, irrespective of the applied regimen. Copyright (C) 2003 John Wiley Sons Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据