Search

Objective: To examine after gastric bypass the effect of peroral versus gastroduodenal feeding on glucose metabolism.Research Design and Methods: A type 2 diabetic patient was examined on 2 consecutive days 5 weeks after gastric bypass. A standard liquid meal was given on the first day into the bypassed gastric remnant and on the second day perorally. Plasma glucose, insulin, C-peptide, glucagon, incretin hormones, peptide YY, and free fatty acids were measured.Results: Peroral feeding reduced 2-h postprandial plasma glucose (7.8 vs. 11.1 mmol/l) and incremental area under the glucose curve (iAUC) (0.33 vs. 0.49 mmol . l(-1) . min(-1)) compared with gastroduodenal feeding. beta-Cell function (iAUC(Cpeptide/Glu)) was more than twofold improved during peroral feeding, and the glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 response increased nearly fivefold.Conclusions: Improvement in postprandial glucose metabolism after gastric bypass is an immediate and direct consequence of the gastrointestinal rearrangement, associated with exaggerated GLP-1 release and independent of changes in insulin sensitivity, weight loss, and caloric restriction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare the 12-month effects of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus blood glucose monitoring (BGM) in adults with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes., Research Design and Methods: This is a single-center, parallel, open-label, randomized controlled trial including adults with inadequately controlled, insulin-treated type 2 diabetes from the outpatient clinic at Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, Denmark. Inclusion criteria were ≥18 years of age, insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, and HbA1c ≥7.5% (58 mmol/mol). Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to 12 months of either CGM or BGM. All participants received a diabetes self-management education course and were followed by their usual health care providers. Primary outcome was between-group differences in change in time in range (TIR) 3.9-10.0 mmol/L, assessed at baseline, after 6 and 12 months by blinded CGM. The prespecified secondary outcomes were differences in change in several other glycemic, metabolic, and participant-reported outcomes., Results: The 76 participants had a median baseline HbA1c of 8.3 (7.8, 9.1)% (67 [62-76] mmol/mol), and 61.8% were male. Compared with BGM, CGM usage was associated with significantly greater improvements in TIR (between-group difference 15.2%, 95% CI 4.6; 25.9), HbA1c (-0.9%, -1.4; -0.3 [-9.4 mmol/mol, -15.2; -3.5]), total daily insulin dose (-10.6 units/day, -19.9; -1.3), weight (-3.3 kg, -5.5; -1.1), and BMI (-1.1 kg/m2, -1.8; -0.3) and greater self-rated diabetes-related health, well-being, satisfaction, and health behavior., Conclusions: In adults with inadequately controlled insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, the 12-month impact of CGM was superior to BGM in improving glucose control and other crucial health parameters. The findings support the use of CGM in the insulin-treated subgroup of type 2 diabetes., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of dasiglucagon, a novel stable glucagon analog in a liquid formulation, in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB)-operated individuals suffering from postbariatric hypoglycemia (PBH)., Research Design and Methods: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial, 10 RYGB-operated participants with continuous glucose monitoring-verified PBH were randomly assigned to 3 trial days, each consisting of a 240-min standardized liquid mixed-meal test with the subcutaneous injection of placebo or 80 μg or 200 μg dasiglucagon., Results: Compared with placebo, treatment with both 80 and 200 μg dasiglucagon raised nadir plasma glucose (PG) (placebo: 3.0 ± 0.2 mmol/L [mean ± SEM]; 80 μg dasiglucagon: 3.9 ± 0.3 mmol/L, P = 0.002; 200 μg dasiglucagon: 4.5 ± 0.2 mmol/L, P = 0.0002) and reduced time in hypoglycemia (PG <3.9 mmol/L) by 70.0 min (P = 0.030 and P = 0.008)., Conclusions: Single-dose administration of dasiglucagon effectively mitigated postprandial hypoglycemia., (© 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.)