Evidence Hub

Comparison Between Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery System (the Artificial Pancreas) and Sensor-Augmented Pump Therapy: A Randomized-Controlled Crossover Trial

A. Haidar, L. Legault, M. Raffray, N. Gouchie-Provencher, P. Jacobs, Anas El-Fathi, J. Rutkowski, V. Messier et al.

Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics, 2020

36 participants · 22 citations

Abstract

Objective: Several studies have shown that closed-loop automated insulin delivery (the artificial pancreas) improves glucose control compared with sensor-augmented pump therapy. We aimed to confirm these findings using our automated insulin delivery system based on the iPancreas platform. Research Design and Methods: We conducted a two-center, randomized crossover trial comparing automated insulin delivery with sensor-augmented pump therapy in 36 adults with type 1 diabetes. Each intervention lasted 12 days in outpatient free-living conditions with no remote monitoring. The automated insulin delivery system used a model predictive control algorithm that was a less aggressive version of our earlier dosing algorithm to emphasize safety. The primary outcome was time in the range 3.9–10.0 mmol/L. Results: The automated insulin delivery system was operational 90.2% of the time. Compared with the sensor-augmented pump therapy, automated insulin delivery increased time in range (3.9–10.0 mmol/L) from 61% (interquartile range 53–74) to 69% (60–73; P = 0.006) and increased time in tight target range (3.9–7.8 mmol/L) from 37% (30–49) to 45% (35–51; P = 0.011). Automated insulin delivery also reduced time spent below 3.9 and 3.3 mmol/L from 3.5% (0.8–5.4) to 1.6% (1.1–2.7; P = 0.0021) and from 0.9% (0.2–2.1) to 0.5% (0.2–1.1; P = 0.0122), respectively. Time spent below 2.8 mmol/L was 0.2% (0.0–0.6) with sensor-augmented pump therapy and 0.1% (0.0–0.4; P = 0.155) with automated insulin…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 36 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free