Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
EDITOR Firstly, the results of the largest study in the meta-analysis, the so
called Dusseldorf study, needs careful interpretation. The authors have
estimated this study to show a positive result for continuous
subcutaneous insulin infusion, with an advantage in percentage of
glycated haemoglobin of 0.68%. This figure will be an estimation made
from a graph, as exact data are not given in the original paper. This
seems to be a correct interpretation of the six month data of this
study, but the total duration of the study was two years. At 12, 18, and 24 months the "advantage" of continuous subcutaneous insulin
infusion can be estimated to be 0.35%, -0.1%, and -0.2%,
respectively. Thus another interpretation of this one study,
representing 918 months of the meta-analysis's total of 2522 patient
months of pump treatment, will have a substantial impact on the overall
outcome of the meta-analysis.
Secondly, the authors did not include the study of Reeves et al in
their analysis. This study, albeit small, did not show a difference in
glycated haemoglobin between intensified injection therapy and insulin
pump therapy.2
Thirdly, modified rapid acting insulins have recently been shown to be
advantageous with respect to glycated haemoglobin.
3 4
The
most relevant comparison is therefore between continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and multiple injection therapy, both using rapid acting insulin analogues.
Only two such studies have been published. The first, by
Hanaire-Broutin et al and included in the meta-analysis, found a 0.35%
lower glycated haemoglobin with insulin pump therapy than with
injection therapy in 41 patients using a crossover design. However,
patients had been receiving insulin pump therapy with human regular
insulin for a mean of 5.5 years before entering the trial, which limits
the external validity of this study. The second study, by Tsui et al,
was published too recently to be included in the meta-analysis but did
not show a difference in glycated haemoglobin over nine months in 21 patients.5
We consider that the case for insulin pump treatment in type 1 diabetes
has still to be decided. Two large multicentre trials comparing this
treatment with optimised injection schemes with rapid acting analogues
have been recently completed and should provide clinically useful information.
We have three comments about Pickup et al's meta-analysis
comparing insulin infusion with injection, which may cast a different
light on their main conclusion.1
hans.devries{at}vumc.nl
Robert J Heine
VU Medical Centre, Diabetes Centre, PO Box 7057, 1007 MB,
Amsterdam, Netherlands
| 1. |
Pickup J, Mattock M, Kerry S.
Glycaemic control with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion compared with intensive insulin injections in patients with type 1 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
BMJ
2002;
324:
705-708 |
| 2. | Reeves ML, Seigler DE, Ryan EA, Skyler JS. Glycemic control in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Comparison of outpatient intensified conventional therapy with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. Am J Med 1982; 72: 673-680[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]. |
| 3. |
Raskin P, Guthrie RA, Leiter L, Riis A, Jovanovic L.
Use of insulin aspart, a fast-acting insulin analog, as the mealtime insulin in the management of patients with type 1 diabetes.
Diabetes Care
2000;
23:
583-588 |
| 4. | Home PD, Lindholm A, Riis A. Insulin aspart vs. human insulin in the management of long-term blood glucose control in Type 1 diabetes mellitus: a randomized controlled trial. European Insulin Aspart Study Group. Diabetes Med 2000; 17: 762-770[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]. |
| 5. |
Tsui E, Barnie A, Ross S, Parkes R, Zinman B.
Intensive insulin therapy with insulin lispro: a randomized trial of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus multiple daily insulin injection.
Diabetes Care
2001;
24:
1722-1727 |
Read all Rapid Responses
Israeli students are refusing to perform intimate examinations on anaesthetised women without their informed consent.