Objective To examine the safety, effectiveness, and cost effectiveness of long acting insulin for type 1 diabetes.Design Systematic review and network meta-analysis.Data sources Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and grey literature were searched through January 2013.Study selection Randomized controlled trials or non-randomized studies of long acting (glargine, detemir) and intermediate acting (neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH), lente) insulin for adults with type 1 diabetes were included.Results 39 studies (27 randomized controlled trials including 7496 patients) were included after screening of 6501 titles/abstracts and 190 full text articles. Glargine once daily, detemir once daily, and detemir once/twice daily significantly reduced hemoglobin A1c compared with NPH once daily in network meta-analysis (26 randomized controlled trials, mean difference −0.39%, 95% confidence interval −0.59% to −0.19%; −0.26%, −0.48% to −0.03%; and −0.36%, −0.65% to −0.08%; respectively). Differences in network meta-analysis were observed between long acting and intermediate acting insulin for severe hypoglycemia (16 randomized controlled trials; detemir once/twice daily versus NPH once/twice daily: odds ratio 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.42 to 0.91) and weight gain (13 randomized controlled trials; detemir once daily versus NPH once/twice daily: mean difference 4.04 kg, 3.06 to 5.02 kg; detemir once/twice daily versus NPH once daily: −5.51 kg, −6.56 to −4.46 kg; glargine once daily versus NPH once daily: −5.14 kg, −6.07 to −4.21). Compared with NPH, detemir was less costly and more effective in 3/14 cost effectiveness analyses and glargine was less costly and more effective in 2/8 cost effectiveness analyses. The remaining cost effectiveness analyses found that detemir and glargine were more costly but more effective than NPH. Glargine was not cost effective compared with detemir in 2/2 cost effectiveness analyses.Conclusions Long acting insulin analogs are probably superior to intermediate acting insulin analogs, although the difference is small for hemoglobin A1c. Patients and their physicians should tailor their choice of insulin according to preference, cost, and accessibility.Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42013003610.

No abstract

BackgroundSternal instability with mediastinitis is a very serious complication after median sternotomy. Biomechanical studies have suggested superiority of rigid plate fixation over wire cerclage for sternal fixation. This study tests the hypothesis that sternal closure stability can be improved by adding plate fixation in a human cadaver model.MethodsMidline sternotomy was performed in 18 human cadavers. Four sternal closure techniques were tested: (1) approximation with six interrupted steel wires; (2) approximation with six interrupted cables; (3) closure 1 (wires) or 2 (cables) reinforced with a transverse sternal plate at the sixth rib; (4) Closure using 4 sternal plates alone. Intrathoracic pressure was increased in all techniques while sternal separation was measured by three pairs of sonomicrometry crystals fixed at the upper, middle and lower parts of the sternum until 2.0 mm separation was detected. Differences in displacement pressures were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA and Regression Coefficients.ResultsIntrathoracic pressure required to cause 2.0 mm separation increased significantly from 183.3 ± 123.9 to 301.4 ± 204.5 in wires/cables alone vs. wires/cables plus one plate respectively, and to 355.0 ± 210.4 in the 4 plates group (p < 0.05). Regression Coefficients (95% CI) were 120 (47–194) and 142 (66–219) respectively for the plate groups.ConclusionTransverse sternal plating with 1 or 4 plates significantly improves sternal stability closure in human cadaver model. Adding a single sternal plate to primary closure improves the strength of sternal closure with traditional wiring potentially reducing the risk of sternal dehiscence and could be considered in high risk patients.