• Something wrong with this record ?

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

L. Petruzelkova, J. Soupal, V. Plasova, P. Jiranova, V. Neuman, L. Plachy, S. Pruhova, Z. Sumnik, B. Obermannova,

. 2018 ; 20 (11) : 744-750. [pub] 20181004

Language English Country United States

Document type Evaluation Study, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

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® 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 56 ± 9 mmol/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 3.9 mmol/L, and time within the target range of 3.9 to 10 mmol/L. RESULTS: The children using the AndroidAPS had significantly lower mean glycemia levels (7.2 ± 2.7 vs. 7.7 ± 2.8 mmol/L; 129.6 ± 49 vs. 138.6 ± 50 mg/dL, P < 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 ± 29 g/(patient ·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.

References provided by Crossref.org

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc19012305
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20190905105830.0
007      
ta
008      
190405s2018 xxu f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.1089/dia.2018.0214 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)30285476
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a xxu
100    1_
$a Petruzelkova, Lenka $u 1 Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital Motol and 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague , Prague, Czech Republic .
245    10
$a Excellent Glycemic Control Maintained by Open-Source Hybrid Closed-Loop AndroidAPS During and After Sustained Physical Activity / $c L. Petruzelkova, J. Soupal, V. Plasova, P. Jiranova, V. Neuman, L. Plachy, S. Pruhova, Z. Sumnik, B. Obermannova,
520    9_
$a 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® 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 56 ± 9 mmol/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 3.9 mmol/L, and time within the target range of 3.9 to 10 mmol/L. RESULTS: The children using the AndroidAPS had significantly lower mean glycemia levels (7.2 ± 2.7 vs. 7.7 ± 2.8 mmol/L; 129.6 ± 49 vs. 138.6 ± 50 mg/dL, P < 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 ± 29 g/(patient ·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.
650    _2
$a mladiství $7 D000293
650    _2
$a krevní glukóza $x metabolismus $7 D001786
650    _2
$a selfmonitoring glykemie $x přístrojové vybavení $x metody $7 D015190
650    _2
$a dítě $7 D002648
650    _2
$a diabetes mellitus 1. typu $x krev $x farmakoterapie $x patofyziologie $7 D003922
650    _2
$a cvičení $x fyziologie $7 D015444
650    _2
$a studie proveditelnosti $7 D005240
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a glykovaný hemoglobin $x metabolismus $7 D006442
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a hypoglykemie $x etiologie $x prevence a kontrola $7 D007003
650    _2
$a hypoglykemika $x aplikace a dávkování $7 D007004
650    _2
$a inzulin $x aplikace a dávkování $7 D007328
650    12
$a inzulinové infuzní systémy $7 D007332
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a pilotní projekty $7 D010865
650    _2
$a lyžování $x fyziologie $7 D012865
655    _2
$a hodnotící studie $7 D023362
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
655    _2
$a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
700    1_
$a Soupal, Jan $u 2 3rd Department of Internal Medicine, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague , Prague, Czech Republic .
700    1_
$a Plasova, Veronika $u 1 Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital Motol and 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague , Prague, Czech Republic .
700    1_
$a Jiranova, Pavlina $u 1 Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital Motol and 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague , Prague, Czech Republic .
700    1_
$a Neuman, Vít $7 xx0232676 $u 1 Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital Motol and 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague , Prague, Czech Republic .
700    1_
$a Plachy, Lukas $u 1 Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital Motol and 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague , Prague, Czech Republic .
700    1_
$a Pruhova, Stepanka $u 1 Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital Motol and 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague , Prague, Czech Republic .
700    1_
$a Sumnik, Zdenek $u 1 Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital Motol and 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague , Prague, Czech Republic .
700    1_
$a Obermannova, Barbora $u 1 Department of Pediatrics, University Hospital Motol and 2nd Faculty of Medicine, Charles University in Prague , Prague, Czech Republic .
773    0_
$w MED00173679 $t Diabetes technology & therapeutics $x 1557-8593 $g Roč. 20, č. 11 (2018), s. 744-750
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30285476 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
990    __
$a 20190405 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20190905110203 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1391615 $s 1050610
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2018 $b 20 $c 11 $d 744-750 $e 20181004 $i 1557-8593 $m Diabetes technology & therapeutics $n Diabetes Technol Ther $x MED00173679
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20190405

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...