Type 2 diabetes is a significant and increasing burden in adolescents and young adults. Clear strategies for research, prevention, and treatment of the disease in these vulnerable patients are needed. Evidence suggests that type 2 diabetes in children is different not only from type 1 but also from type 2 diabetes in adults. Understanding the unique pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes in youth, as well as the risk of complications and the psychosocial impact, will enable industry, academia, funding agencies, advocacy groups, and regulators to collectively evaluate both current and future research, treatment, and prevention approaches. This Consensus Report characterizes type 2 diabetes in children, evaluates the fundamental differences between childhood and adult disease, describes the current therapeutic options, and discusses challenges to and approaches for developing new treatments.

No abstract

Fractures are common injuries caused by child abuse. Although the consequences of failing to diagnose an abusive injury in a child can be grave, incorrectly diagnosing child abuse in a child whose fractures have another etiology can be distressing for a family. The aim of this report is to review recent advances in the understanding of fracture specificity, the mechanism of fractures, and other medical diseases that predispose to fractures in infants and children. This clinical report will aid physicians in developing an evidence-based differential diagnosis and performing the appropriate evaluation when assessing a child with fractures. Pediatrics 2014;133:e477-e489 INTRODUCTIONFractures are the second most common injury caused by child physical abuse; bruises are the most common injury. 1 Failure to identify an injury caused by child abuse and to intervene appropriately may place a child at risk for further abuse, with potentially permanent consequences for the child. 2-4 Physical abuse may not be considered in the physician' s differential diagnosis of childhood injury because the caregiver may have intentionally altered the history to conceal the abuse. 5 As a result, when fractures are initially evaluated, a diagnosis of child abuse may be missed. 3 In children younger than 3 years, as many as 20% of fractures caused by abuse may be misdiagnosed initially as noninflicted or as attributable to other causes. 3 In addition, fractures may be missed because radiography is performed before changes are obvious or the radiographic images are misread or misinterpreted. 2 However, incorrectly diagnosing physical abuse in a child with noninflicted fractures has serious consequences for the child and family. To identify child abuse as the cause of fractures, the physician must take into consideration the history, the age of the child, the location and type of fracture, the mechanism that causes the particular type of fracture, and the presence of other injuries while also considering other possible causes. DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS OF FRACTURES Trauma: Child Abuse Versus Noninflicted InjuriesFractures are a common childhood injury and account for between 8% and 12% of all pediatric injuries. [6][7][8] In infants and toddlers, physical FROM THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICSGuidance for the Clinician in Rendering Pediatric Care by guest on May 11, 2018 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/ Downloaded from abuse is the cause of 12% to 20% of fractures. 9 Although unintentional fractures are much more common than fractures caused by child abuse, the physician needs to remain aware of the possibility of inflicted injury. Although some fracture types are highly suggestive of physical abuse, no pattern can exclude child abuse. 10,11 Specifically, it is important to recognize that any fracture, even fractures that are commonly noninflicted injuries, can be caused by child abuse. Certain details that can help the physician determine whether a fracture was caused by abuse rather than unintentional injury include the hist...

OBJECTIVEAmong adolescents with type 2 diabetes, there is limited information regarding incidence and progression of hypertension and microalbuminuria. Hypertension and microalbuminuria assessments made during the TODAY clinical trial were analyzed for effect of treatment, glycemic control, sex, and race/ethnicity.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSA cohort of 699 adolescents, 10–17 years of age, <2 years duration of type 2 diabetes, BMI ≥85%, HbA1c ≤8% on metformin therapy, controlled blood pressure (BP), and calculated creatinine clearance >70 mL/min, were randomized to metformin, metformin plus rosiglitazone, or metformin plus intensive lifestyle intervention. Primary study outcome was loss of glycemic control for 6 months or sustained metabolic decompensation requiring insulin. Hypertension and microalbuminuria were managed aggressively with standardized therapy to maintain BP <130/80 or <95th percentile for age, sex, and height and microalbuminuria <30 μg/mg.RESULTSIn this cohort, 319 (45.6%) reached primary study outcome, and 11.6% were hypertensive at baseline and 33.8% by end of study (average follow-up 3.9 years). Male sex and higher BMI significantly increased the risk for hypertension. Microalbuminuria was found in 6.3% at baseline and rose to 16.6% by end of study. Diagnosis of microalbuminuria was not significantly different between treatment arms, sex, or race/ethnicity, but higher levels of HbA1c were significantly related to risk of developing microalbuminuria.CONCLUSIONSPrevalence of hypertension and microalbuminuria increased over time among adolescents with type 2 diabetes regardless of diabetes treatment. The greatest risk for hypertension was male sex and higher BMI. The risk for microalbuminuria was more closely related to glycemic control.

Concerns about bone health and potential fragility in children and adolescents have led to a high interest in bone densitometry. Pediatric patients with genetic and acquired chronic diseases, immobility, and inadequate nutrition may fail to achieve expected gains in bone size, mass, and strength, leaving them vulnerable to fracture. In older adults, bone densitometry has been shown to predict fracture risk and reflect response to therapy. The role of densitometry in the management of children at risk of bone fragility is less clear. This clinical report summarizes current knowledge about bone densitometry in the pediatric population, including indications for its use, interpretation of results, and risks and costs. The report emphasizes updated consensus statements generated at the 2013 Pediatric Position Development Conference of the International Society of Clinical Densitometry by an international panel of bone experts. Some of these recommendations are evidence-based, whereas others reflect expert opinion, because data are sparse on many topics. The statements from this and other expert panels provide general guidance to the pediatrician, but decisions about ordering and interpreting bone densitometry still require clinical judgment. The interpretation of bone densitometry results in children differs from that in older adults. The terms “osteopenia” and “osteoporosis” based on bone densitometry findings alone should not be used in younger patients; instead, bone mineral content or density that falls &gt;2 SDs below expected is labeled “low for age.” Pediatric osteoporosis is defined by the Pediatric Position Development Conference by using 1 of the following criteria: ≥1 vertebral fractures occurring in the absence of local disease or high-energy trauma (without or with densitometry measurements) or low bone density for age and a significant fracture history (defined as ≥2 long bone fractures before 10 years of age or ≥3 long bone fractures before 19 years of age). Ongoing research will help define the indications and best methods for assessing bone strength in children and the clinical factors that contribute to fracture risk. The Pediatric Endocrine Society affirms the educational value of this publication.