Assessment of Meal Anticipation for Improving Fully Automated Insulin Delivery in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes
Authors' conclusion
Although postprandial control remained optimal with hybrid AID, both fully AID solutions offered overall TIR >70% with similar or lower exposure to hypoglycemia. Anticipation did not significantly improve postprandial control in AID systems but also did not increase hypoglycemic risk when meals were delayed.
Study context
- Population
- Adults with T1D (age 44.5 ± 15.4 years; HbA1c 6.7 ± 0.9%; 23 women, 12 men)crossover
- Participants
- 35 adults
- Comparison
- Full closed loop (FCL) with meal anticipation vs FCL
- Primary endpoint
- Percent TIR 70-180 mg/dL during the breakfast postprandial period, FCL+ vs FCL
- Follow-up
- 5-h period after breakfast
Methodological detailscrossover, three supervised 24-h admissions
- Crossover
- Three supervised 24-h admissions
Primary result
As reported in the abstract
TIR after breakfast
No significant difference
Further findings
| Outcome | HCL | P value |
|---|---|---|
| TIR after dinner (1.5-h delayed)FCL+ vs FCL | P = 1.0 | |
| TBR after dinnerFCL+ vs FCL · TBR reduced in FCL+ | P = 0.03 | |
| Overall 24-h control | 86 ± 10 % |
- TIR after dinner (1.5-h delayed): FCL+ 71 ± 34 %
- TIR after dinner (1.5-h delayed): FCL 72 ± 29 %
- Time below range (TBR) after dinner: FCL+ median 0 (IQR 0–0) %
- TBR after dinner: FCL median 0 (IQR 0–0.8) %
- Overall 24-h control: FCL 77 ± 11 %
- Overall 24-h control: FCL+ 77 ± 12 %
TBR 2 h before dinner
- TBR similar for FCL and FCL+
Original publication
Assessment of Meal Anticipation for Improving Fully Automated Insulin Delivery in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes. Diabetes Care. Published 21 July 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →