Wednesday 01 February 2012, 10:04AM
PEARLS 334, September 2011, written by Brian R McAvoy
Clinical question
How effective is targeting intensive glycaemic control for type 2
diabetes?
Bottom line
Intensive treatment regimens are usually directed towards an
average glycosylated haemoglobin A1c level (HbA1c) of 7.0% or less.
There was insufficient evidence to demonstrate whether targeting
intensive glycaemic control influenced all-cause or cardiovascular
mortality. Intensive glycaemic control was likely to reduce the
risk of microvascular disease (retinopathy, nephropa.thy) as a
composite outcome and may reduce the occurrence of some other
specific outcomes, such as non-fatal myocardial infarction and
lower extremity amputation. Targeting intensive glycaemic control,
compared with conventional glycaemic control, increased the risk of
severe adverse events including both mild and severe
hypoglycaemia.
Caveat
Separate analysis of intensive glycaemic control as a part of a
multimodal treatment regimen could not be performed due to lack of
data. Although it was not possible to pool quality of life data, it
is conceivable that targeting intensive, compared with conventional
glycaemic control, may negatively affect quality of life for
patients aiming to cope with sometimes very complex and
time-consuming treatment modalities and combinations.
Context
Patients with type 2 diabetes exhibit an increased risk of
cardio.vascular disease and mortality compared with the background
population. Observational studies report a relationship between
reduced blood glucose and reduced risk of both microvascular and
macrovascular complications in patients with type 2
diabetes.
Cochrane Systematic Review
Hemmingsen B, et al. Targeting intensive glycaemic control versus
targeting conventional glycaemic control for type 2 diabetes
mel.litus. Cochrane Reviews, 2011, Issue 6. Article No: CD008143.
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008143.pub2. This review contains 20
studies involving 29,986 participants.