Excellent Glycemic Control Maintained by Open-Source Hybrid Closed-Loop AndroidAPS During and After Sustained Physical Activity
Jazyk angličtina Země Spojené státy americké Médium print-electronic
Typ dokumentu hodnotící studie, časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem
PubMed
30285476
DOI
10.1089/dia.2018.0214
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- AndroidAPS, Do-it-yourself systems., Open-source hybrid closed loop,
- MeSH
- cvičení fyziologie MeSH
- diabetes mellitus 1. typu krev farmakoterapie patofyziologie MeSH
- dítě MeSH
- glykovaný hemoglobin metabolismus MeSH
- hypoglykemie etiologie prevence a kontrola MeSH
- hypoglykemika aplikace a dávkování MeSH
- inzulin aplikace a dávkování MeSH
- inzulinové infuzní systémy * MeSH
- krevní glukóza metabolismus MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- lyžování fyziologie MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- pilotní projekty MeSH
- selfmonitoring glykemie přístrojové vybavení metody MeSH
- studie proveditelnosti MeSH
- Check Tag
- dítě MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladiství MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- hodnotící studie MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
- Názvy látek
- glykovaný hemoglobin MeSH
- hemoglobin A1c protein, human MeSH Prohlížeč
- hypoglykemika MeSH
- inzulin MeSH
- krevní glukóza MeSH
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.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
