1
|
Ruan S, Guo X, Ren Y, Cao G, Xing H, Zhang X. Nanomedicines based on trace elements for intervention of diabetes mellitus. Biomed Pharmacother 2023; 168:115684. [PMID: 37820567 DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2023.115684] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2023] [Revised: 09/28/2023] [Accepted: 10/08/2023] [Indexed: 10/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Epidemiology shows that the incidence of diabetes mellitus (DM) is increasing year by year globally. Proper interventions are highly aspired for diabetics to improve the quality of life and prevent development of chronic complications. Trace elements, also known as microelements, are chemical substances that are present in our body in minute amounts. They are necessitated by the body for growth, development and functional metabolism. For the past few years, trace element nanoparticles have aroused considerable interest as a burgeoning form of nanomedicines in antidiabetic applications. These microelement-based nanomedicines can regulate glucose metabolism in several ways, showing great potential for diabetes management. Starting from the pathophysiology of diabetes, the state-of-the-art of diabetes treatment, the physiological roles of trace elements, various emerging trace element nanoparticles specific for diabetes were comprehensively reviewed in this work. Our findings disclose that trace element nanoparticles can fight against diabetes by lowering blood glucose, promoting insulin secretion, alleviating glucose intolerance, improving insulin sensitivity, ameliorating lipid profile, anti-inflammation and anti-oxidant stress, and other mechanisms. In conclusion, trace element nanoparticles can be applied as nanomedicines or dietary modifiers for effective intervention for diabetes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuxian Ruan
- Department of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Xiaolei Guo
- Office of Academic Research, Binzhou Polytechnic, Binzhou, China
| | - Yuehong Ren
- Department of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China
| | - Guangshang Cao
- Department of Pharmaceutics, Affiliated Hospital of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, China.
| | - Huijie Xing
- Key Laboratory of Ministry of Education for Viral Pathogenesis & Infection Prevention and Control, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
| | - Xingwang Zhang
- Department of Pharmaceutics, College of Pharmacy, Jinan University, Guangzhou, China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Abstract
BACKGROUND Hyperglycemia is prevalent and is associated with an increase in morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. Insulin therapy is the most appropriate method for controlling glycemia in hospital, but is associated with increased risk of hypoglycemia, which is a barrier to achieving glycemic goals. AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY Optimal glycemic targets have not been established in the critical and noncritical hospitalized patients, and there are different modalities of insulin therapy. The primary purpose of this review is to discuss controversy regarding appropriate glycemic targets and summarize the evidence about the safety and efficacy of insulin therapy in critical and noncritical care settings. DATA SOURCES A literature search was conducted through PubMed with the following key words (inpatient hyperglycemia, inpatient diabetes, glycemic control AND critically or non-critically ill patient, Insulin therapy in hospital). RESULTS In critically ill patient, blood glucose levels >180 mg/dL may increase the risk of hospital complications, and blood glucose levels <110 mg/dL have been associated with an increased risk of hypoglycemia. Continuous intravenous insulin infusion is the best method for achieving glycemic targets in the critically ill patient. The ideal glucose goals for noncritically ill patients remain undefined and must be individualized according to the characteristics of the patients. A basal-bolus insulin strategy resulted in better glycemic control than sliding scale insulin and lower risk of hypoglycemia than premixed insulin regimen. CONCLUSIONS Extremes of blood glucose lead to poor outcomes, and target glucose range of 110-180 mg/dL may be appropriate for most critically ill patients and noncritically ill patients. Insulin is the most appropriate pharmacologic agent for effectively controlling glycemia in hospital. A continuous intravenous insulin infusion and scheduled basal-bolus-correction insulin are the preferred modalities for glycemic control in critically and noncritically ill hospitalized patients, respectively.
Collapse
|
3
|
Vogt AP, Bally L. Perioperative glucose management: Current status and future directions. Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol 2020; 34:213-224. [DOI: 10.1016/j.bpa.2020.04.015] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2020] [Revised: 04/22/2020] [Accepted: 04/28/2020] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
|
4
|
Karslioglu French E, Donihi AC, Korytkowski MT. Diabetic ketoacidosis and hyperosmolar hyperglycemic syndrome: review of acute decompensated diabetes in adult patients. BMJ 2019; 365:l1114. [PMID: 31142480 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.l1114] [Citation(s) in RCA: 80] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/14/2022]
Abstract
Diabetic ketoacidosis and hyperosmolar hyperglycemic syndrome (HHS) are life threatening complications that occur in patients with diabetes. In addition to timely identification of the precipitating cause, the first step in acute management of these disorders includes aggressive administration of intravenous fluids with appropriate replacement of electrolytes (primarily potassium). In patients with diabetic ketoacidosis, this is always followed by administration of insulin, usually via an intravenous insulin infusion that is continued until resolution of ketonemia, but potentially via the subcutaneous route in mild cases. Careful monitoring by experienced physicians is needed during treatment for diabetic ketoacidosis and HHS. Common pitfalls in management include premature termination of intravenous insulin therapy and insufficient timing or dosing of subcutaneous insulin before discontinuation of intravenous insulin. This review covers recommendations for acute management of diabetic ketoacidosis and HHS, the complications associated with these disorders, and methods for preventing recurrence. It also discusses why many patients who present with these disorders are at high risk for hospital readmissions, early morbidity, and mortality well beyond the acute presentation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Esra Karslioglu French
- Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Amy C Donihi
- University of Pittsburgh School of Pharmacy, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Mary T Korytkowski
- Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
|
6
|
Umpierrez GE, Klonoff DC. Diabetes Technology Update: Use of Insulin Pumps and Continuous Glucose Monitoring in the Hospital. Diabetes Care 2018; 41:1579-1589. [PMID: 29936424 PMCID: PMC6054505 DOI: 10.2337/dci18-0002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 161] [Impact Index Per Article: 23.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2018] [Accepted: 04/20/2018] [Indexed: 02/03/2023]
Abstract
The use of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems has gained wide acceptance in diabetes care. These devices have been demonstrated to be clinically valuable, improving glycemic control and reducing risks of hypoglycemia in ambulatory patients with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes. Approximately 30-40% of patients with type 1 diabetes and an increasing number of insulin-requiring patients with type 2 diabetes are using pump and sensor technology. As the popularity of these devices increases, it becomes very likely that hospital health care providers will face the need to manage the inpatient care of patients under insulin pump therapy and CGM. The American Diabetes Association advocates allowing patients who are physically and mentally able to continue to use their pumps when hospitalized. Health care institutions must have clear policies and procedures to allow the patient to continue to receive CSII treatment to maximize safety and to comply with existing regulations related to self-management of medication. Randomized controlled trials are needed to determine whether CSII therapy and CGM systems in the hospital are associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with intermittent monitoring and conventional insulin treatment or with a favorable cost-benefit ratio.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Guillermo E Umpierrez
- Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Lipids, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA
| | - David C Klonoff
- Diabetes Research Institute, Mills-Peninsula Medical Center, San Mateo, CA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW The purpose of this article was to review recent guideline recommendations on glycemic target, glucose monitoring, and therapeutic strategies, while providing practical recommendations for the management of medical and surgical patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) admitted to critical and non-critical care settings. RECENT FINDINGS Studies evaluating safety and efficacy of insulin pump therapy, continuous glucose monitoring, electronic glucose management systems, and closed loop systems for the inpatient management of hyperglycemia are described. Due to the increased prevalence and life expectancy of patients with type 1 diabetes, a growing number of these patients require hospitalization every year. Inpatient diabetes management is complex and is best provided by a multidisciplinary diabetes team. In the absence of such resource, providers and health care staff must become familiar with the features of this condition to avoid complications such as severe hyperglycemia, ketoacidosis, hypoglycemia, or glycemic variability. We reviewed most recent guidelines and relevant literature in the topic to provide practical recommendations for the inpatient management of patients with T1D.
Collapse
|
8
|
Abstract
Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is commonly used in the outpatient setting to improve diabetes management. CGM can provide real-time glucose trends, detecting hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia before the onset of clinical symptoms. In 2011, at the time the Endocrine Society CGM guidelines were published, the society did not recommend inpatient CGM as its efficacy and safety were unknown. While many studies have subsequently evaluated inpatient CGM accuracy and reliability, glycemic outcome studies have not been widely published. In the non-ICU setting, investigational CGM studies have commonly blinded providers and patients to glucose data. Retrospective review of the glucose data reflects increased hypoglycemia detection with CGM. In the ICU setting, data are inconsistent whether CGM can improve glycemic outcomes. Studies have not focused on hospitalized patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, the population most likely to benefit from inpatient CGM. This article reviews inpatient CGM glycemic outcomes in the non-ICU and ICU setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David L. Levitt
- Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Nutrition, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Kristi D. Silver
- Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Nutrition, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Elias K. Spanakis
- Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Nutrition, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Nutrition, Baltimore Veterans Administration Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
- Elias K. Spanakis, MD, University of Maryland School of Medicine and Baltimore Veterans Administration Medical Center, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes, and Nutrition, 10 N Greene St, 5D134, Baltimore, MD 21201, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Duggan EW, Klopman MA, Berry AJ, Umpierrez G. The Emory University Perioperative Algorithm for the Management of Hyperglycemia and Diabetes in Non-cardiac Surgery Patients. Curr Diab Rep 2016; 16:34. [PMID: 26971119 DOI: 10.1007/s11892-016-0720-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
Hyperglycemia is a frequent manifestation of critical and surgical illness, resulting from the acute metabolic and hormonal changes associated with the response to injury and stress (Umpierrez and Kitabchi, Curr Opin Endocrinol. 11:75-81, 2004; McCowen et al., Crit Care Clin. 17(1):107-24, 2001). The exact prevalence of hospital hyperglycemia is not known, but observational studies have reported a prevalence of hyperglycemia ranging from 32 to 60 % in community hospitals (Umpierrez et al., J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 87(3):978-82, 2002; Cook et al., J Hosp Med. 4(9):E7-14, 2009; Farrokhi et al., Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab. 25(5):813-24, 2011), and 80 % of patients after cardiac surgery (Schmeltz et al., Diabetes Care 30(4):823-8, 2007; van den Berghe et al., N Engl J Med. 345(19):1359-67, 2001). Retrospective and randomized controlled trials in surgical populations have reported that hyperglycemia and diabetes are associated with increased length of stay, hospital complications, resource utilization, and mortality (Frisch et al., Diabetes Care 33(8):1783-8, 2010; Kwon et al., Ann Surg. 257(1):8-14, 2013; Bower et al., Surgery 147(5):670-5, 2010; Noordzij et al., Eur J Endocrinol. 156(1):137-42, 2007; Mraovic et al., J Arthroplasty 25(1):64-70, 2010). Substantial evidence indicates that correction of hyperglycemia reduces complications in critically ill, as well as in general surgery patients (Umpierrez et al., J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 87(3):978-82, 2002; Clement et al., Diabetes Care 27(2):553-97, 2004; Pomposelli et al., JPEN J Parented Enteral Nutr. 22(2):77-81, 1998). This manuscript reviews the pathophysiology of stress hyperglycemia during anesthesia and the perioperative period. We provide a practical outline for the diagnosis and management of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care of patients with diabetes and hyperglycemia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Matthew A Klopman
- Department of Anesthesiology, Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, USA
| | - Arnold J Berry
- Department of Anesthesiology, Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Abstract
The transition from intravenous (IV) to subcutaneous (SQ) insulin in the hospitalized patient with diabetes or hyperglycemia is a key step in patient care. This review article suggests a stepwise approach to the transition in order to promote safety and euglycemia. Important components of the transition include evaluating the patient and clinical situation for appropriateness, recognizing factors that influence a safe transition, calculation of proper SQ insulin doses, and deciding the appropriate type of SQ insulin. This article addresses other clinical situations including the management of patients previously on insulin pumps and recommendations for patients requiring glucocorticoids and enteral tube feedings. The use of institutional and computerized protocols is discussed. Further research is needed regarding the transition management of subgroups of patients such as those with type 1 diabetes and end-stage renal disease.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kathryn Evans Kreider
- Department of Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Metabolism and Nutrition, Duke University Medical Center, Box 3922, Durham, NC, 27710, USA,
| | | |
Collapse
|