GÜLŞAH ELBÜKEN, Resul YILDIZ, İsmail YILDIZ, SAYİD SHAFİ ZUHUR

Evaluation of type 1 diabetic patients: A single center experience

We evaluated patients diagnosed with type 1 DM who were followed at our clinic by conducting a retrospective chart review. Medical records of a total of 147 patients with type 1 DM (70 females, 77 males) with a mean (±SD) age of 31.2±9.7 years were reviewed retrospectively. The study patients had a mean duration of follow-up of 13.9±9.5 years, mean duration of follow-up of 4±2.6 years at our clinic and a mean HbA1c value of 8.3±2.1%. Microvascular complications were recorded in medical files for 128 patients. There were 48 (37.5%) patients with at least one microvascular complication. Medical records showed that out of 128 patients, 23 (18%) had diabetic neuropathy alone, 4(3%) had diabetic retinopathy alone and 5 (4%) had diabetic nephropathy alone. Ten patients (8%) had both diabetic nephropathy and diabetic retinopathy and 6 (4.7%) patients had all three microvascular complications. No significant difference was observed between patients with or without microvascular complications in terms of HbA1c (HbA1c 8.3% versus 8.1%; p=0.85). A history of diabetic foot ulcer was present in 4 patients in the study sample (4/147=2.7% of all patients).Twenty-two (15%) patients were on insulin pump therapy during follow-up. Insulin pump users had a significantly lower HbA1c value (7.9%) compared to those not using insulin pump (8.5%) (p=0.02). At our clinic, special efforts are being made to ensure type 1 diabetic individuals have regular outpatient examinations. Despite all these measures, our patients are still far from reaching their target HbA1c values, suggesting that we have to do much more help patients achieve their glycemic goals.

PDF

___

1. Molitch ME, Steffes MW, Cleary PA, et al. Baseline analysis of renal function in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. Kidney Int. 1993;43:668.

2. Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group, Nathan DM, Genuth S, et al. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulindependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:977.

3. The relationship of glycemic exposure (HbA1c) to the risk of development and progression of retinopathy in the diabetes control and complications trial. Diabetes. 1995;44:968.

4. Reichard P, Nilsson BY, Rosenqvist U. The effect of long-term intensified insulin treatment on the development of microvascular complications of diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993;329:304.

5. Shankar A, Klein R, Klein BE, et al. Association between glycosylated hemoglobin level and cardiovascular and all-cause mortality in type 1 diabetes. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;166:393.

6. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Type 1 diabetes in adults: diagnosis and management. www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng17/Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2019 accessed 09.17.2018

7. Miller KM, Foster NC, Beck RW, et al. Current state of type 1 diabetes treatment in the US: updated data from the T1D Exchange clinic registry. Diabetes Care. 2015;38:971-8.

8. Nathan DM, Cleary PA, Backlund JY, et al. Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2643.

9. Benkhadra K, Alahdab F, Tamhane SU, et al. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion versus multiple daily injections in individuals with type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endocrine. 2017;55:77.

10. Misso ML, Egberts KJ, Page M, et al. Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) versus multiple insulin injections for type 1 diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;CD005103.

11. REPOSE Study Group. Relative effectiveness of insulin pump treatment over multiple daily injections and structured education during flexible intensive insulin treatment for type 1 diabetes: cluster randomised trial (REPOSE). Br Med J. 2017;356:1285.

12. Patterson CC, Dahlquist GG, Gyürüs E, et al. Incidence trends for childhood type 1 diabetes in Europe during 1989-2003 and predicted new cases 2005- 20: a multicentre prospective registration study. Lancet. 2009;373:2027.

13. Tuomilehto J. Theemerging global epidemic of type 1 diabetes. Curr Diab Rep. 2013;13:795.

14. Vehik K, Hamman RF, Lezotte D, et al. Increasing incidence of type 1 diabetes in 0- to 17-year-old Colorado youth. Diabetes Care. 2007;30:503.

15. Lipman TH, LevittKatz LE, Ratcliffe SJ, et al. Increasing incidence of type 1 diabetes in youth: twenty years of the Philadelphia Pediatric Diabetes Registry. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:1597.

16. Tamatea JAU, Chepulis LM, Wang C, et al. Glycaemic control across the lifespan in a cohort of New Zealand patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Intern Med J. 2020 Mar 16.

17. Mayer-Davis EJ, Lawrence JM, Dabelea D, et al. Incidence Trends of Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes among Youths, 2002-2012. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:1419.

18. Nathan DM, Bayless M, Cleary P, et al. Diabetes control and complications trial/epidemiology of diabetes interventions and complications study at 30 years: advances and contributions. Diabetes 2013;62:3976.

19. National Kidney Foundation. K/DOQI clinical practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002;39:1.

20. Levey AS, Coresh J, Balk E, et al. National Kidney Foundation practice guidelines for chronic kidney disease: evaluation, classification, and stratification. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139:137.

21. Levey AS, Eckardt KU, Tsukamoto Y, et al. Definition and classification of chronic kidney disease: a position statement from Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO). Kidney Int. 2005;67:2089.

22. Pettus JH, Zhou FL, Shepherd L, et al. Differences between patients with type 1 diabetes with optimal and suboptimal glycaemic control: A real-world study of more than 30 000 patients in a US electronic health record database. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2020;22:622-30.

23. Fullerton B, Jeitler K, Seitz M, et al. Intensive glucose control versus conventional glucose control for type 1 diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;009122.