4.3 Article

Do high fasting glucose levels suggest nocturnal hypoglycaemia? The Somogyi effect-more fiction than fact?

期刊

DIABETIC MEDICINE
卷 30, 期 8, 页码 914-917

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/dme.12175

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0611-10248] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims The Somogyi effect postulates that nocturnal hypoglycaemia causes fasting hyperglycaemia attributable to counter-regulatory hormone release. Although most published evidence has failed to support this hypothesis, this concept remains firmly embedded in clinical practice and often prevents patients and professionals from optimizing overnight insulin. Previous observational data found lower fasting glucose was associated with nocturnal hypoglycaemia, but did not assess the probability of infrequent individual episodes of rebound hypoglycaemia. We analysed continuous glucose monitoring data to explore its prevalence. Methods We analysed data from 89 patients with Type 1 diabetes who participated in the UK Hypoglycaemia study. We compared fasting capillary glucose following nights with and without nocturnal hypoglycaemia (sensor glucose < 3.5 mmol/l). Results Fasting capillary blood glucose was lower after nights with hypoglycaemia than without [5.5 (3.0) vs. 14.5 (4.5) mmol/l, P < 0.0001], and was lower on nights with more severe nocturnal hypoglycaemia [5.5 (3.0) vs. 8.2 (2.3) mmol/l; P = 0.018 on nights with nadir sensor glucose of < 2.2 mmol/l vs. 3.5 mmol/l]. There were only two instances of fasting capillary blood glucose > 10 mmol/l after nocturnal hypoglycaemia, both after likely treatment of the episode. When fasting capillary blood glucose is < 5 mmol/l, there was evidence of nocturnal hypoglycaemia on 94% of nights. Conclusion Our data indicate that, in clinical practice, the Somogyi effect is rare. Fasting capillary blood glucose <= 5 mmol/l appears an important indicator of preceding silent nocturnal hypoglycaemia.

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

4.3
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