Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0011854 (type 1 diabetes)
 20,749 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

For 2 months we observed side-effects and indwelling times when using a subcutaneous catheter (Insuflon, Viggo AB, Sweden) for insulin injections. This method is used by approximately 600 children and adolescents with IDDM in Sweden today. 22 children and adolescents aged 4-19 years with a diabetes duration of 4.0 +/- 3.0 (mean +/- SD) years participated. Their HbA1c was 5.8 +/- 1.0%. All used 4-6 dosages of insulin per day. The catheter was placed subcutaneously in the abdominal wall, and replaced by parents when home tests showed increased blood or urine glucose, when the child experienced pain or when skin changes were observed. The 22 patients used 239 catheters with a mean time between changing catheters of 4.8 +/- 2.2 (range 0.5-17) days (= 1147 catheter days). Noted side effects were (% of catheter days): fixation problems, 5.6%; minor infection/irritation (= redness greater than 1 mm), 5.6%; pain, 2.8%; sore skin from plastic wings, 2.4%; itching/dry skin, 2.0%; eczema from band-aid, 1.7%; blocked catheter/injection needle, 1.6%; leakage of insulin, 1.3%, transient lipohypertrophies, 1.1%; hematoma/blood in catheter, 0.8%, and moist skin, 0.3%. No major infections requiring surgical or antibiotic treatment occurred. In conclusion, the use of indwelling insulin catheters seems to be a safe method to lessen the pain of insulin injections with a low frequency of side effects. The long-term metabolic control was not altered in this group of well-controlled children. We therefore find that we can recommend the use of indwelling catheters to children and adolescents who have difficulties with injections because of needle phobia or pain, particularly when using MIT.
 ...
PMID:Side effects and indwelling times of subcutaneous catheters for insulin injections: a new device for injecting insulin with a minimum of pain in the treatment of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. 224 6

In order to analyze the initial cost-effectiveness of transfer to two treatments with insulin lispro in type 1 diabetes, a pharmaco-economic study was conducted for nine months. After an educational reinforcement, a group of 30 C-peptide-negative patients (31.8 +/- 11.5 years [mean +/- SD], time since diagnosis of diabetes of 9.2 +/- 7.1 years, and on intensive therapy for 5.3 +/- 3.1 years) initiated a 3-month basal period with their usual therapy (preprandial rapid insulin and nocturnal NPH). Patients were then randomly assigned to one of the two groups, changing rapid insulin to either lispro (L1) or lispro combined with 15% to 20% NPH insulin (L2). Cross-over was made 3 months after the first treatment. Efficacy and safety were established by the assessment of HbA1c, self-monitoring blood glucose and hypoglycemia rates. Therapy cost was measured by systematic examination of the injection devices and wastage of insulin. The mean prescribed and actually consumed doses for R, L1, L2 groups were 52.9, 57.1, 55.2 U and 60.3, 64.1, 63 U per day, respectively (p < 0.001). The average of postprandial peak glucose (9.7, 8.4, 8.3 mM; p < 0.001) and HbA1c (7.6%, 7.2%, 7.1%; p < 0.01) were significantly lower after L1 or L2 lispro therapy. Although no statistical differences in overall hypoglycemia rates were observed, fewer nocturnal episodes were detected (0.72, 0.37, 0.41 events/month). The mean daily cost for regular insulin treatment was lower (186.8, 241.8; 215.7 pts and 53.7 pts per day. Efficacy and safety for two MIT regimens containing lispro were similar in the short run. Nevertheless, the preprandial use of the fast-acting insulin analog lispro in combination with a 15%-20% intermediate-acting NPH seemed to be more cost-effective than the premeal lispro therapy alone.
 ...
PMID:[Conversion of fast insulin intensive therapy to lispro insulin in type I diabetes. Pharmacoeconomic analysis of cost-effectiveness]. 1159 56