The inability to achieve optimal diabetes glucose control in people with diabetes is multifactorial, but one contributor may be inadequate control of postprandial glucose. In patients treated with multiple daily injections of insulin, both the dose and timing of meal‐related rapid‐acting insulin are key factors in this. There are conflicting opinions and evidence on the optimal time to administer mealtime insulin. We performed a comprehensive literature search to review the published data, focusing on the use of rapid‐acting insulin analogues in patients with Type 1 diabetes. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies of rapid‐acting insulin analogues, together with postprandial glucose excursion data, suggest that administering these 15–20 min before food would provide optimal postprandial glucose control. Data from clinical studies involving people with Type 1 diabetes receiving structured meals and rapid‐acting insulin analogues support this, showing a reduction in post‐meal glucose levels of ~30% and less hypoglycaemia when meal insulin was taken 15–20 min before a meal compared with immediately before the meal. Importantly, there was also a greater risk of postprandial hypoglycaemia when patients took rapid‐acting analogues after eating compared with before eating.

Here we review the capabilities and benefits of CGM, including cost-effectiveness data, and discuss the potential limitations of this glucosemonitoring strategy for the management of patients with diabetes. Funding: Sanofi US, Inc.

With the emphasis on intensive management of type 1 diabetes, data from studies support frequent monitoring of glucose levels to improve glycemic control and reduce glucose variability, which can be related to an increase in macro and microvascular complications. However, few perform capillary blood glucose that frequently. There are currently two available alternatives that this review will discuss, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and flash glucose monitoring. CGM has become an important diagnostic and therapeutic option in optimizing diabetes management. CGM systems are now more accurate, smaller, and easier to use compared to original models. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated that CGM can improve Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1C) and reduce glucose variability in both continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion and multiple daily injection users. When used in an automated ''insulin-suspend'' system, reduced frequency of hypoglycemia and shorter time spent in hypoglycemic range have been demonstrated. Despite the potential benefits CGM has to offer in clinical practice, concerns exist on the accuracy of these devices and patient compliance with therapy, which may prevent the true clinical benefit of CGM being achieved, as observed in RCTs. Flash glucose monitoring systems FreeStyle Ò LibreÔ (Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA) are as accurate as many CGM systems available and have the added benefit of being factory calibrated. Studies have shown that flash glucose monitoring systems are very well tolerated by patients and effectively reduce glucose variability, increasing time in range.

Flow mediated dilation (FMD) stimulated by different shear stress stimulus profiles may recruit distinct transduction mechanisms, and provide distinct information regarding endothelial function. The purpose of this study was to determine whether obesity influences brachial artery FMD differently depending on the shear stress profile used for FMD assessment. The FMD response to a brief, intermediate, and sustained shear stress profile was assessed in obese (n = 9) and lean (n = 19) young men as follows: brief stimulus, standard reactive hyperemia (RH) following a 5 min forearm occlusion (5 min RH); intermediate stimulus, RH following a 15 min forearm occlusion (15 min RH); sustained stimulus, 10 min of handgrip exercise (HGEX). Brachial artery diameter and mean shear stress were assessed using echo and Doppler ultrasound, respectively, during each FMD test. There was no group difference in HGEX shear stress (p = 0.390); however, the obese group had a lower HGEX-FMD (5.2 ± 3.0% versus 11.5 ± 4.4%, p < 0.001). There was no group difference in 5 min RH-FMD (p = 0.466) or 15 min RH-FMD (p = 0.181); however, the shear stress stimulus was larger in the obese group. After normalization to the stimulus the 15 min RH-FMD (p = 0.002), but not the 5 min RH-FMD (p = 0.118) was lower in the obese group. These data suggest that obesity may have a more pronounced impact on the endothelium's ability to respond to prolonged increases in shear stress.