Background: Automated insulin delivery (AID) systems have shown to improve glycemic control in a range of populations and settings. At the start of this study, only one commercial AID system had entered the Austrian market (MiniMed 670G, Medtronic). However, there is an ever-growing community of people living with type 1 diabetes (PWT1D) using open-source (OS) AID systems. Materials and Methods: A total of 144 PWT1D who used either the MiniMed 670G (670G) or OS-AID systems routinely for a period of at least three to a maximum of six months, between February 18, 2020 and January 15, 2023, were retrospectively analyzed (116 670G aged from 2.6 to 71.8 years and 28 OS-AID aged from 3.4 to 53.5 years). The goal is to evaluate and compare the quality of glycemic control of commercially available AID and OS-AID systems and to present all data by an in-depth descriptive analysis of the population. No statistical tests were performed. Results: The PWT1D using OS-AID systems spent more time in range (TIR) 70-180 mg/dL (81.7% vs 73.9%), less time above range (TAR) 181-250 mg/dL (11.1% vs 19.6%), less TAR >250 mg/dL (2.5% vs 4.3%), and more time below range (TBR) 54-69 mg/dL (2.2% vs 1.7%) than PWT1D using the 670G system. The TBR <54 mg/dL was comparable in both groups (0.3% vs 0.4%). In the OS-AID group, median glucose level and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were lower than in the 670G system group (130 vs 150 mg/dL; 6.2% vs 7.0%). Conclusion: In conclusion, both groups were able to achieve satisfactory glycemic outcomes independent of age, gender, and diabetes duration. However, the PWT1D using OS-AID systems attained an even better glycemic control with no clinical safety concerns.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schütz et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: