Comparison of two carbohydrate intake strategies to improve glucose control during exercise in adolescents and adults with type 1 diabetes.
Adolescent
Adult
Age Factors
Biomarkers
/ blood
Blood Glucose
/ metabolism
Cross-Over Studies
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1
/ blood
Dietary Carbohydrates
/ administration & dosage
Exercise
Female
Glycated Hemoglobin
/ metabolism
Glycemic Control
Humans
Hypoglycemia
/ blood
Male
Middle Aged
Quebec
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Carbohydrate intake
Glycemic control & hypoglycemia
Physical activity
Type 1 diabetes
Journal
Nutrition, metabolism, and cardiovascular diseases : NMCD
ISSN: 1590-3729
Titre abrégé: Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9111474
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 04 2021
09 04 2021
Historique:
received:
08
07
2020
revised:
08
12
2020
accepted:
10
12
2020
pubmed:
27
2
2021
medline:
7
4
2021
entrez:
26
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
During aerobic physical activity (PA), hypoglycemia is common in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Few studies have compared the effectiveness of different carbohydrate (CHO) intake strategies to prevent PA-induced hypoglycemia. Our objective was to compare the efficacy of two CHO intake strategies, same total amount but different CHO intake timing, to maintain glucose levels in the target range (4.0-10.0 mmol/L) during PA in people with T1D. An open-label, randomized, crossover study in 33 participants (21 adults; 12 adolescents). Participants practiced 60 min PA sessions (ergocyle) at 60% VO In people living with T1D, for a 60 min moderate aerobic PA in the post-absorptive condition, a 0.5 g/kg CHO intake helped most participants maintain acceptable glycemic control with both strategies. No clinically significant difference was observed between the SCI and DCI strategies. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03214107 (July 11, 2017).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
During aerobic physical activity (PA), hypoglycemia is common in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Few studies have compared the effectiveness of different carbohydrate (CHO) intake strategies to prevent PA-induced hypoglycemia. Our objective was to compare the efficacy of two CHO intake strategies, same total amount but different CHO intake timing, to maintain glucose levels in the target range (4.0-10.0 mmol/L) during PA in people with T1D.
METHODS AND RESULTS
An open-label, randomized, crossover study in 33 participants (21 adults; 12 adolescents). Participants practiced 60 min PA sessions (ergocyle) at 60% VO
CONCLUSIONS
In people living with T1D, for a 60 min moderate aerobic PA in the post-absorptive condition, a 0.5 g/kg CHO intake helped most participants maintain acceptable glycemic control with both strategies. No clinically significant difference was observed between the SCI and DCI strategies. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03214107 (July 11, 2017).
Identifiants
pubmed: 33632598
pii: S0939-4753(20)30520-2
doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2020.12.011
pii:
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers
0
Blood Glucose
0
Dietary Carbohydrates
0
Glycated Hemoglobin A
0
hemoglobin A1c protein, human
0
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03214107']
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1238-1246Subventions
Organisme : CIHR
Pays : Canada
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 The Italian Diabetes Society, the Italian Society for the Study of Atherosclerosis, the Italian Society of Human Nutrition and the Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II University. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of competing interest R.R.-L.: Research grants: Diabetes Canada, Astra-Zeneca, E Lilly, Cystic Fibrosis Canada, CIHR, Janssen, JDRF, Merck, NIH, Novo-Nordisk, Prometic Société Francophone du Diabète, Sanofi-Aventis, Vertex Pharmaceutical. Consulting/advisory panel: Abbott, Amgen, Astra-Zeneca, Boehringer I, Dexcom, E Lilly, HSL therapeutics, Insulet, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, Neomed, Novo-Nordisk, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis. Honoraria for conferences: Abbott, Astra-Zeneca, Boehringer I, CPD Network, Dexcom, E Lilly, Janssen, Medtronic, Merck, Novo-Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis, Vertex Pharmaceutical. Consumable gift (in Kind): Animas, E Lilly, Medtronic. Unrestricted grants fors clinical and educational activities: Abbott, E Lilly, Medtronic, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis. Patent: T2D risk biomarkers, catheter life. Purchase fees: E Lilly (artificial pancreas). M.H.: holds a Diabetes Junior Investigator Award from the Canadian Society of Endocrinology and Metabolism/AstraZeneca and a Fonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé Junior 2 salary award. L.L.: Lilly and Dexcom advisory committee, research funds (paid to the institution): Merck, and Astra-Zeneca. Intellectual property in the field of closed loop (not marketed). V.M.: Purchase fees: E Lilly (artificial pancreas). L.G.-G: grants from IRSC, grants from FRQS, during the conduct of the study. M.-B.S: Grants from JDRF/ISPAD Research Fellowship, during the conduct of the study. C.S., A.F., N.T., S.T. & A.S. have no relevant conflict of interest to disclose.