A double-blind randomized comparison of meal-related glycemic control by repaglinide and glyburide in well-controlled type 2 diabetic patients.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to compare diurnal blood glucose excursions and the effects of accidental dietary noncompliance in type 2 diabetic patients who are well-controlled on either repaglinide or glyburide treatment. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This single-center double-blind randomized study comprised type 2 diabetic patients whose mean fasting blood glucose value after repaglinide/glyburide titration and stabilization was in the range of 90-140 mg/dl. The study consisted of an initial screening day, a titration period of 3 weeks, a 1-week stabilization period, a study period, and an end-of-study day. During the 3-day study period, half the patients of each group received two meals on the first day and three meals on the next 2 days, and in the other half, this sequence was reversed. Repaglinide was administered preprandially with each meal, and glyburide was administered as recommended in current labeling, i.e., either one or two daily doses before breakfast and dinner, regardless of whether lunch had been omitted. The diurnal blood glucose excursions on a day in which three meals were eaten were compared between the two groups, and the minimum blood glucose concentration (BGmin) measurements were compared between lunch and dinner on days with three and two meals. RESULTS: Of the 83 randomized patients, 43 entered into the 3-day study period and completed the trial. The results showed no significant differences between the repaglinide and glyburide groups in average blood glucose excursions from fasting blood glucose (P = 0.44). The influence on the mean BGmin of omitting a meal differed significantly between the repaglinide and glyburide groups (P = 0.014). In the latter group, BGmin decreased from 77 to 61 mg/dl as a result of omitting lunch, whereas in the repaglinide group, BGmin was unchanged for the two-meal day (78 mg/dl) and the three-meal day (76 mg/dl). All hypoglycemic events (n = 6) occurred in the glyburide group on the two-meal day, in connection with omitting lunch. No hypoglycemic events were recorded in the repaglinide group. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that treatment with repaglinide in well-controlled type 2 diabetic patients who miss or delay a meal is superior to treatment with longer-acting sulfonylurea drugs (such as glyburide) with respect to the risk of hypoglycemic episodes.     

那格列奈与瑞格列奈治疗2型糖尿病的随机双盲多中心临床研究

目的　观察国产 2类新药那格列奈片剂的治疗 2型糖尿病的疗效和安全性。方法　采用随机双盲双模拟、那格列奈片剂与瑞格列奈片剂 ( 1∶1)平行对照、多中心研究设计 ,整个试验过程历时 14周 ,药物观察期 12周。 4个中心 2 3 3例患者进入本试验 ,其中试验组 (A组 ) 117例 ,对照组 (B组 ) 116例。结果　降血糖效果 :对照组与试验组糖化血红蛋白 (HbA1c)、餐后血糖 ( 2hPBG)、空腹血糖 (FBG)治疗 12周后均明显下降 ,前后对照有统计学意义 (P <0 0 5 ) ,但下降率 2组比较无统计学差异 ( P >0 0 5 )。脂代谢指标的变化 :治疗 12周时对照组和试验组甘油三酯 (TG)和总胆固醇 (TC)均较治疗前有下降 ,但仅试验组TG治疗前后比较有显著性差异 (P <0 0 1) ,2组间前后比较均无显著性差异。治疗 12周中仅对照组 1例PLT用药后降低。发生不良反应共 4例次 ,其中对照组 2例 ,分别为头昏和血小板 (PLT)下降 ;试验组 2例 ,分别为手抖和低血糖反应 ;对照组 1例因头昏停药 ,其余 3例均为轻度 ,不影响治疗。不良反应发生率比较无显著性意义。提示瑞格列奈与那格列奈 12周的治疗安全性较好 ,患者能良好耐受试验。结论　那格列奈与瑞格列奈治疗糖尿病的疗效相似 ,不良反应少 ,是一种安全有效的降糖药物     

Optimizing insulin secretagogue therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized double-blind study with repaglinide

OBJECTIVE: Repaglinide, a novel antidiabetic agent that has a rapid onset and short duration of action, was developed for mealtime dosing. The purpose of this pharmacodynamic study was to validate a prandial regimen of repaglinide by comparing meal-related dosing with a regimen in which the same total daily dose was divided into only two doses at morning and evening meals. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The study was a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group trial in 19 antidiabetic agent-naive subjects with type 2 diabetes (mean age 58 years, known duration of diabetes 3.5 years, HbA(1c) 7.3%, and BMI 32 kg/m(2)). Patients were randomly assigned to receive repaglinide either before each of the three main meals or before breakfast and before the evening meal. Patients in both groups received the same total daily dose of repaglinide. Twenty-four hour profiles of blood glucose, plasma insulin, and plasma C-peptide concentrations were measured at baseline and after 4 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: Repaglinide increased postprandial insulin levels and markedly reduced postprandial glucose levels relative to baseline in both groups. Significant reductions were also recorded in fasting blood glucose and HbA(1c) levels. The repaglinide regimen, in which a dose was taken before each main meal, was more effective in improving glycemic control (including postprandial glucose and HbA(1c) levels) than the same total dose of repaglinide divided into morning and evening mealtime doses. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the strategy of mealtime dosing with repaglinide. The improvements in glycemic control observed in these patients are encouraging. In addition to classic parameters of glycemic control, improvements in postprandial glucose excursions may prove to be important because postprandial hyperglycemia has been suggested to be an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease in diabetes.     

Appropriate insulin regimes for type 2 diabetes: a multicenter randomized crossover study

OBJECTIVE: To directly compare the rate of hypoglycemia and metabolic control achieved on once-daily ultralente insulin administration with twice-daily NPH insulin administration in patients with type 2 diabetes. Patient treatment satisfaction and quality of life were also examined before and during each treatment. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A crossover study was performed involving five centers and 79 patients with type 2 diabetes (fasting blood glucose > 8 mmol/l) with a 2-month run-in followed by two 6-month periods of either NPH or ultralente insulin administration. Patients were managed by a specialist nurse using a dosage adjustment protocol. RESULTS: HbA1c was lower with NPH insulin therapy during each of the 6-month periods (9.7 +/- 0.2 vs. 9.1 +/- 0.3 and 9.8 +/- 0.2 vs. 9.0 +/- 0.3 mmol/l; both P < 0.01). The difference was accounted for by higher evening glucose levels with ultralente insulin (fasting 8.2 +/- 0.3 vs. 8.2 +/- 0.3 mmol/l, 6:00 P.M. 11.5 +/- 0.4 vs. 10.6 +/- 0.4 mmol/l). Despite worse control, the total number of hypoglycemic episodes was greater with ultralente insulin (220 vs. 171), and hypoglycemic episodes requiring third-party assistance occurred almost entirely with ultralente (14 vs. 1). Treatment satisfaction scores increased more with NPH insulin compared with ultralente and rose further upon changing to NPH insulin, but fell upon changing to ultralente insulin. These changes were highly significant (P < 0.001). Diabetes quality of life improved on both regimens. CONCLUSIONS: These data clearly demonstrate the lower hypoglycemia rate, better glucose control, and greater treatment satisfaction accompanying therapy for type 2 diabetes with twice daily NPH compared with once daily ultralente insulin.     

A prospective,randomized, double-blind multicenter comparison of parenteral ertapenem and ceftriaxone for the treatment of hospitalized adults with community-acquired pneumonia

BACKGROUND: Ertapenem is a once-daily parenteral beta-lactam licensed in the United States in November 2001 and in Europe in May 2002. OBJECTIVE: This study compared the efficacy and safety profiles of ertapenem with those of ceftriaxone for the treatment of hospitalized adult patients with serious community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) requiring parenteral therapy. METHODS: In this prospective, double-blind (with sponsor blinding), multicenter study, adult patients with CAP were stratified by Pneumonia Severity Index (< or = 3 or > 3) and age (< or = 65 or > 65 years) and randomized (2:1) to receive IV or intramuscular (IM) ertapenem 1 g once daily or IV or IM ceftriaxone 1 g once daily. Investigators could switch patients to an oral antimicrobial agent if clinical improvement was shown after at least 3 days of parenteral therapy. RESULTS: A total of 364 patients were randomized to treatment: 239 to the ertapenem group and 125 to the ceftriaxone group. Three patients in the ertapenem group and 2 in the ceftriaxone group did not receive study therapy. Of the treated patients, 77.1% (182/236) of patients in the ertapenem group and 75.6% (93/123) in the ceftriaxone group were clinically evaluable. Among clinically evaluable patients, the mean (SD) durations of parenteral and total (parenteral plus optional oral) therapy were 5.5 (2.6) and 11.5 (2.7) days for ertapenem and 5.6 (2.8) and 11.7 (3.0) days for ceftriaxone, respectively. Streptococcus pneumoniae was the most frequently isolated pathogen in both treatment groups. Cure rates were 92.2% for clinically evaluable patients in the ertapenem group and 93.6% for those in the ceftriaxone group (95% CI for the difference, adjusted for stratum, -8.6 to 5.7), fulfilling the criteria for statistical equivalence. At completion of parenteral therapy, 94.7% of patients in the ertapenem group and 95.8% in the ceftriaxone group showed clinical improvement. Infused vein complications (ertapenem, 3.4% [8/236]; ceftriaxone, 7.3% [9/123]) and elevated transaminase levels (ertapenem, 6.3% [13/207]; ceftriaxone, 7.1% [8/113]) were the most common adverse events in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of hospitalized adult patients, ertapenem therapy, with an oral switch option, was as effective as ceftriaxone with the same oral switch option for treatment of CAP requiring initial parenteral therapy. The overall safety profiles of the 2 drugs were comparable.     

A randomized,double-blind,controlled, parallel-group comparison of perindopril and candesartan in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND: When choosing an antihypertensive drug for patients with hypertension and diabetes mellitus (DM), the metabolic side effects, possibility of improving some metabolic parameters, and need for adequate blood pressure control must all be considered. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to compare the impacts of perindopril and candesartan on blood pressure, glucose metabolism, serum lipid profile, and metabolic parameters in patients with mild hypertension and type 2 DM during therapy and after a 1-month washout period. METHODS: Type 2 DM patients with mild hypertension and good glucose control who were not taking hypercholesterolemic drugs were enrolled. Perindopril 4 mg QD or candesartan 16 mg QD was administered for 12 months in this randomized, double-blind, controlled, parallel-group clinical trial. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting plasma insulin (FPI), glycosylated hemoglobin, homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) index, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]), plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 (PAI-1), homocysteine, body mass index (BMI), and albumin excretion rate (AER) were assessed. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients (49 women and 47 men; mean [SD] ages, 53 [10] years [perindopril] and 55 [9] years [candesartan]) were enrolled. Mean (SD) body weight, height, and BMI were 78.2 (9.4) kg, 1.69 (0.05) m, and 27.2 (2.0) kg/m(2) in the perindopril group and 77.5 (8.6) kg, 1.70 (0.06) m, and 26.8 (2.5) kg/m(2) in the candesartan group. A significant change occurred from baseline to month 12 during treatment with perindopril in SBP and DBP (both P < 0.01), FPG (P < 0.05), FPI (P < 0.05), TC (P < 0.05), LDL-C (P < 0.05), Lp(a) (P < 0.05), PAM (P < 0.05), and AER (P < 0.05). Significant changes from baseline to month 12 occurred with candesartan in SBP and DBP (both P < 0.01) and AER (P < 0.05). The HOMA index was significantly lower at month 12 in the perindopril group than in the candesartan group (P < 0.05). When we interrupted perindopril and candesartan therapy for a 1-month washout period, changes in SBP and DBP values were significant compared with month 12 in both groups (all P < 0.05). Changes in TC and LDL-C from month 12 to the end of washout were significant only in the perindopril group (both P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Perindopril and candesartan both effectively lowered blood pressure in this group of patients with mild hypertension and type 2 DM. Perindopril showed an improvement on some metabolic parameters compared with candesartan. However, the inclusion/exclusion criteria could limit the ability to extrapolate the results to a general population.     

Improved postprandial glycemic control with insulin aspart. A randomized double-blind cross-over trial in type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Insulin aspart is a novel rapid-acting insulin analog. This study was performed to compare the postprandial serum glucose control after administration of insulin aspart with that of unmodified human insulin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The trial was a double-blind double-dummy injection three-way cross-over study in 22 subjects with type 1 diabetes. Insulin aspart was injected subcutaneously immediately before the meal, and human insulin was injected subcutaneously 30 min before the meal or immediately before the meal. RESULTS: The postprandial glucose control as assessed by the excursion of serum glucose was superior with insulin aspart as compared with that with human insulin injected immediately before or 30 min before a meal (891 +/- 521 vs. 1,311 +/- 512 vs. 1,106 +/- 571 mmol.l-1.min-1, P < 0.0001 and P < 0.02). This was accompanied by a significantly lower glucose maximum concentration [Cmax(SG)] for insulin aspart than for human insulin injected immediately before the meal (13.5 +/- 3.5 vs. 16.4 +/- 3.4 mmol/l, P < 0.001). Insulin aspart was, on average, absorbed twice as fast as human insulin, with median time to insulin aspart Cmax(ins) on the order of 40 min, and the maximum concentration was approximately twice as high for insulin aspart. The relative bioavailability of the insulins indicated a similar extent of absorption. Insulin aspart was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the ability of insulin aspart to improve postprandial glucose control when compared with human insulin.     

Multicenter comparison of glyburide and glipizide in the treatment of non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus

A multicenter, randomized, open-label comparison of glyburide and glipizide was made in 109 patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus whose fasting plasma glucose levels had been maintained at less than or equal to 140 mg/dl by tolbutamide, chlorpropamide, or glyburide. After an initial evaluation, patients entered a dose-adjustment phase to establish the optimal daily dose of the assigned drug--glyburide or glipizide--needed to maintain metabolic control. A second evaluation was made at the end of this phase. Patients then proceeded into the maintenance phase, which lasted approximately three months. A final evaluation was made upon completion of or withdrawal from the maintenance phase. Metabolic control was monitored by means of determinations of fasting plasma glucose and hemoglobin A1c. Comparative efficacy was assessed in relation to the doses of the respective drugs needed to maintain acceptable metabolic control. Safety was evaluated through reports of adverse effects as well as through laboratory tests and measurements of vital signs at each patient visit.     

A comparison of the effects of rosiglitazone and glyburide on cardiovascular function and glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE: This open-label, active-controlled study investigated the cardiac safety and antihyperglycemic effect of rosiglitazone (RSG) in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Of the 203 patients randomly assigned to RSG (4 mg b.i.d.) or glyburide (GLB) (titrated to achieve optimal glycemic control for the first 8 weeks only to limit the risk of hypoglycemia; mean 10.5 mg/day), 118 had an echocardiogram performed at week 52. Left ventricular (LV) mass index, ejection fraction, and left ventricular end-diastolic volume were assessed by M-mode echocardiography at baseline and weeks 12, 28, and 52; 24-h ambulatory blood pressure was assessed at baseline and at weeks 28 and 52. Glycemic control was assessed by measuring fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and HbA(1c). RESULTS: Neither treatment produced an increase in LV mass index that exceeded 1 SD. Ejection fraction did not change in either group. Both groups had clinically insignificant increases in LV end-diastolic volume. RSG, but not GLB, caused a statistically significant reduction in ambulatory diastolic blood pressure. Both treatments reduced HbA(1c) and FPG. CONCLUSIONS: A total of 52 weeks of therapy with RSG (4 mg b.i.d.) did not adversely affect cardiac structure or function in patients with type 2 diabetes and produced significant and sustained reductions in hyperglycemia. Decreases in ambulatory diastolic blood pressure with RSG were superior to those with GLB.     

A randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparison of gatifloxacin versus ciprofloxacin in the treatment of complicated urinary tract infection and pyelonephritis

BACKGROUND: Gatifloxacin is a fluoroquinolone antibiotic with a broad spectrum of in vitro and in vivo activity against the gram-negative and gram-positive pathogens frequently implicated in urinary tract infections (UTIs). OBJECTIVE: This study compared the clinical and bacteriologic efficacy and tolerability of gatifloxacin versus ciprofloxacin in adult patients with complicated UTIs or pyelonephritis. METHODS: In this double-blind, multicenter, randomized, comparative study, patients were treated with either gatifloxacin 400 mg once daily or ciprofloxacin 500 mg twice daily for 7 to 10 days. Bacteriologic eradication (by quantitative urine culture) and clinical efficacy rates were assessed at a test-of-cure visit (5 to 9 days and 4 to 11 days posttreatment, respectively) and at an extended follow-up visit (29-42 days and 25-50 days posttreatment, respectively). RESULTS: A total of 372 adults were randomized to treatment, 189 to gatifloxacin and 183 to ciprofloxacin. The most commonly isolated pretreatment pathogens (n = 292) were Escherichia coli (53%) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (13%). Pathogen eradication rates for complicated UTIs were 92% and 83% with gatifloxacin and ciprofloxacin, respectively (95% CI, -4.1% to 24.5%); for pyelonephritis, the respective rates were 92% and 85% (95% CI, -20% to 37%). Clinical response rates of >90% were observed in both treatment groups among patients with complicated UTIs as well as those with pyelonephritis. Sustained eradication rates were 76% (64/84) with gatifloxacin and 66% (52/79) with ciprofloxacin. Both drugs were well tolerated, with the most common adverse events in both treatment groups being nausea, dizziness, diarrhea, and vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: Gatifloxacin is comparable to ciprofloxacin based on clinical efficacy and bacteriologic eradication rates for the treatment of complicated UTIs or pyelonephri- tis and is associated with a low incidence of clinically significant adverse events.     

Avanafil for the treatment of erectile dysfunction: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study in men with diabetes mellitus

ObjectiveTo prospectively assess the safety and effectiveness of the investigational phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor avanafil to treat erectile dysfunction in men with diabetes mellitus.Patients and MethodsThis 12-week, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study conducted between December 15, 2008, and February 11, 2010, randomized 390 men with diabetes and erectile dysfunction 1:1:1 to receive avanafil, 100 mg (n=129), avanafil, 200 mg (n=131), or placebo (n=130). Coprimary end points assessed changes in the percentage of sexual attempts in which men were able to maintain an erection of sufficient duration to have successful intercourse (Sexual Encounter Profile [SEP] 3), percentage of sexual attempts in which men were able to insert the penis into the partner's vagina (SEP 2), and International Index of Erectile Function erectile function domain score.ResultsCompared with placebo, least-squares mean change from baseline to study end in SEP 3, SEP 2, and International Index of Erectile Function erectile function domain score were significantly improved with both avanafil, 100 mg (P≤.002), and avanafil, 200 mg (P<.001). Additional analyses indicated that successful intercourse could be initiated in 15 minutes or less through more than 6 hours after avanafil dosing. Adverse events most commonly reported with avanafil treatment were headache, nasopharyngitis, flushing, and sinus congestion.ConclusionAvanafil was safe and effective for treating erectile dysfunction in men with diabetes and was effective as early as 15 minutes and more than 6 hours after dosing. The adverse events seen with avanafil were similar to those seen with other phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors.Trial Registrationclinicaltrials.gov Identifier NCT00809471.     

国产瑞格列奈治疗2型糖尿病的疗效和安全性

目的对国产瑞格列奈(孚来迪)的疗效及安全性进行评价.方法共观察30例2型糖尿病患者,开放性研究,治疗前后自身对照;进行2周清洗期后予国产瑞格列奈1.0 mg,每日3次,为期12周,观察空腹、餐后血糖、糖化血红蛋白、肝肾功能、体重、血脂等的变化.结果与治疗前相比,空腹和餐后血糖及糖化血红蛋白水平均有显著下降(P<0.01),体重增加,肌酐水平升高,但均未超过正常值,肝功能正常.结论国产瑞格列奈有明确的降低空腹、餐后血糖及糖化血红蛋白的效果,不良反应少,是一种安全、有效、价廉的降糖药物.     

甘精胰岛素联合瑞格列奈治疗预混胰岛素疗效欠佳的2型糖尿病效果观察

目的探讨每日2次预混胰岛素治疗的2型糖尿病患者转为每日注射一次甘精胰岛素联合瑞格列奈治疗的有效性和安全性。方法 46例每日注射2次预混胰岛素（联合或不联合口服降糖药）血糖控制欠佳的2型糖尿病患者换用每日注射一次甘精胰岛素联合瑞格列奈治疗,在治疗第0周及12周分别记录空腹血糖、餐后2小时血糖、糖化血红蛋白（HbA1c）及胰岛素用量。结果治疗12周后空腹血糖、餐后2小时血糖、HbA1c均较基线水平显著下降（P〉0.05）;治疗前后胰岛素剂量无明显差异（P〉0.05）;低血糖事件共发生3人次。结论预混胰岛素治疗血糖控制欠佳的2型糖尿病患者转为每日注射一次甘精胰岛素联合瑞格列奈治疗能有效并安全的控制血糖。     

Comparison between repaglinide and glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a one-year,randomized, double-blind assessment of metabolic parameters and cardiovascular risk factors

BACKGROUND: Repaglinide and glimepiride are relatively new oral hypoglycemic agents. Few data are available concerning their effects on metabolic parameters other than measures of glycemic control. OBJECTIVES: In addition to assessing the effects of repaglinide and glimepiride on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, this study also examined the effects of these agents on 3 metabolic parameters known to be cardiovascular risk factors--lipoprotein(a) (Lp[a]), plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1), and homocysteine (Hcy). METHODS: This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial was conducted at a single center in Italy. Eligible patients were nonsmokers; had no hypertension or coronary heart disease; were taking no hypolipidemic drugs, diuretics, beta-blockers, or thyroxin; and had normal renal function. After an initial 4-week placebo washout period, patients were randomized to receive repaglinide 1 mg/d or glimepiride 1 mg/d. The dose of study drug was optimized over an 8-week titration period, which was followed by a 12-month treatment period. Measures of glycemic control (glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c], fasting plasma glucose [FPG], postprandial plasma glucose [PPG], fasting plasma insulin [FPI], postprandial plasma insulin [PPI]) and the other metabolic parameters of interest were assessed after 6 and 12 months of treatment. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-four patients (63 women, 61 men) completed the study, 62 in each treatment group. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics between groups. After 6 and 12 months of treatment, FPG levels and HbA1c values were significantly reduced from baseline in both groups (6 months, P < 0.05; 12 months, P < 0.01). After 6 months, PPG levels were significantly decreased only in the repaglinide group (P < 0.05 vs baseline); at 12 months, however, PPG levels were significantly reduced from baseline in both groups (P < 0.01 repaglinide, P < 0.05 glimepiride). No significant changes from baseline in FPI or PPI levels were seen in either group at 6 months, although FPI levels were significantly increased in the repaglinide group at 12 months (P < 0.05). Repaglinide significantly lowered levels of Lp(a), PAI-1, and Hcy after 12 months (all, P < 0.05 vs baseline). Glimepiride significantly lowered levels of Lp(a) and Hcy after 6 months (both, P < 0.05 vs baseline) and levels of Lp(a) (P < 0.01 vs baseline), Hcy (P < 0.01 vs baseline), and PAI-1 (P < 0.05 vs baseline) after 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Repaglinide and glimepiride improved glycemic control and reduced levels of other metabolic parameters of interest in this population of patients with type 2 diabetes. It is possible that the reductions in Lp(a), PAI-1, and Hcy were the result of improved glucose metabolism; however, the possibility that repaglinide and glimepiride may have a direct effect on these parameters should not be excluded.     

手术治疗2型糖尿病——回顾性临床研究及近期临床试用报告

目的探讨胃旁路手术（GBP）治疗2型糖尿病（NIDDM）。方法回顾性观察11例并存NIDDM的病人因其它疾病接受过类似GBP手术（胃大部切除，Roux—en—Y型毕2式胃肠吻合）者11例；4例NIDDM病人用GBP治疗。结果葡萄糖耐量试验提示NIDDM病人手术治疗前后各时相血糖改变非常显著（P〈0．001），糖尿病及其并发症也得到缓解和治愈。结论无论是否并存肥胖症，GBP是治疗NIDDM的有前景的方法。     

Perinatal risk factors for childhood type 1 diabetes in Europe. The EURODIAB Substudy 2 Study Group.

OBJECTIVE: To explore whether perinatal factors are associated with the development of childhood type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We studied hospital records from 892 cases of childhood type 1 diabetes compared with 2,291 population-based control subjects in seven study centers in Europe. RESULTS: In a pooled analysis incorporating stratification by center, we confirmed the previous findings that older maternal age, maternal preeclampsia, neonatal respiratory disease, and jaundice caused by blood group incompatibility are significant risk factors for type 1 diabetes, whereas being a firstborn child, having a low birth weight, or having a short birth length were protective. Cesarean section delivery and neonatal infectious diseases were not significantly associated with the risk of type 1 diabetes in this study. The strongest association was found for blood group incompatibility (AB0 and Rh factor) with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.96 (95% CI 1.88-4.65). AB0 incompatibility (OR = 3.92) was a more common and also a stronger risk factor than Rh incompatibility (OR = 1.62). The effect of AB0 blood group incompatibility was independent of treatment effects in logistical regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Different perinatal events are associated with an increased risk of type 1 diabetes. The effect of maternal-child blood group incompatibility is strong and indicates a true effect that must be further explored.