Diabetes Surgery Research Articles

The Specialist Treatment of Inpatients: Caring for Diabetes in Surgery (STOIC-D Surgery) Trial: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Early Intervention With an Electronic Specialist-Led Model of Diabetes Care.

To investigate the effect of early intervention with an electronic specialist-led "proactive" model of care on glycemic and clinical outcomes. The Specialist Treatment of Inpatients: Caring for Diabetes in Surgery (STOIC-D Surgery) randomized controlled trial was performed at the Royal Melbourne Hospital. Eligible participants were adults admitted to a surgical ward during the study with either known diabetes or newly detected hyperglycemia (at least one random blood glucose result ≥11.1 mmol/L). Participants were randomized 1:1 to standard diabetes care or the intervention consisting of an early consult by a specialist inpatient diabetes team using electronic tools for patient identification, communication of recommendations, and therapy intensification. The primary outcome was median patient-day mean glucose (PDMG). The key secondary outcome was incidence of health care-associated infection (HAI). Between 12 February 2021 and 17 December 2021, 1,371 admissions met inclusion criteria, with 680 assigned to early intervention and 691 to standard diabetes care. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The early intervention group achieved a lower median PDMG of 8.2 mmol/L (interquartile range [IQR] 6.9-10.0 mmol/L) compared with 8.6 mmol/L (IQR 7.2-10.3 mmol/L) in the control group for an estimated difference of -0.3 mmol/L (95% CI -0.4 to -0.2 mmol/L, P < 0.0001). The incidence of HAI was lower in the intervention group (77 [11%] vs. 110 [16%]), for an absolute risk difference of -4.6% (95% CI -8.2 to -1.0, P = 0.016). In surgical inpatients, early diabetes management intervention with an electronic specialist-led diabetes model of care reduces glucose and HAI.

Bariatric versus diabetes surgery after five years of follow up

Bariatric surgery (BS) is totally different from diabetes surgery (DS) in the patient characters, goals of surgery, and management although similar in surgical procedure. Comparison of BS and DS with long-term data is lacking. A retrospective review of patients who received BS and patients who received DS at Min-Sheng General Hospital from 2007 to 2013 was designed. All inpatient and outpatient follow-up data were analyzed. Patients undergoing BS for the treatment of morbid obesity were compared with patients undergoing metabolic surgery for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Patients who received revision surgeries were excluded. The main outcome measures were: (1) operation risk; (2) weight loss; and (3) diabetes remission. Between 2007 and 2013, 2073 patients who received BS and 741 patients who received DS were recruited from both centers. DS patients were older (41.1 ± 10.9 years vs. 33.1 ± 9.3 years, p < 0.05) and were more likely to be male (40.2% vs. 28.2%, p < 0.05) and to have diabetes (100% vs. 6.0%, p < 0.05), however, they had similar body mass index (BMI) (37.9 ± 8.0 vs. 38.5 ± 9.7, p = 0.78) compared to the BS patients. Surgical procedures are significantly different between the two groups (73.3% of the DS surgeries were gastric bypass procedure, whereas this procedure made up only 47.1% of BS surgeries). Although the major complication rates were similar (2.0% vs. 2.4%), the DS program had a significant higher mortality rate than the BS program (0.54% vs. 0.1%; p < 0.05). At the 5-year follow-up time point, 58.0% of the BS patients had achieved successful results (weight loss > 30%) and 80% of the DS patients had complete remission of their diabetes [hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) < 6.0%]. Both the DS and the BS group had good results in up to 85% of the patients at the 5-year follow-up time point. The clinical profiles were very different between the BS and the DS programs. Both programs achieved the desired outcomes equally well, however, the DS program had a higher risk than the BS program.

Health &amp; illness: After bypass, gut burns more sugar: Changes could explain bariatric surgery's diabetes benefits

Science NewsVolume 184, Issue 4 p. 14-14 In the News Health & illness: After bypass, gut burns more sugar: Changes could explain bariatric surgery's diabetes benefits Meghan Rosen, Meghan RosenSearch for more papers by this author Meghan Rosen, Meghan RosenSearch for more papers by this author First published: 14 August 2013 https://doi.org/10.1002/scin.5591840415Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume184, Issue424 August 2013Pages 14-14 RelatedInformation

Effect of Diabetes in Surgery

Effect of Diabetes in Surgery

Management of diabetes in surgery: a survey of current practice by anaesthetists.

A questionnaire survey of anaesthetists, based at the three main hospitals in Bristol, was undertaken to determine what methods are currently being used by anaesthetists to manage diabetes in patients for surgery. Replies were received from 56 of the 90 anaesthetists (62%). Surgical procedures were defined as minor, moderate, and major. Two areas were identified where considerable differences in management between anaesthetists occurred, namely insulin-treated patients requiring minor surgery, and non-insulin-treated patients requiring moderate surgery. In addition, no consensus view was apparent for the preferred intra-operative blood glucose range or for the threshold blood glucose level at which to postpone an operation. It was apparent that anaesthetists preferred to administer intravenous insulin by a syringe pump rather than by a drip bag containing insulin, potassium, and glucose, particularly if more severe metabolic upset was anticipated. No difference in management was apparent between different hospital grades or between the three hospitals.