Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Introduction Data on the persistence of glycemic benefits beyond the first year of automated insulin delivery are scarce, especially in large pediatric multicenter settings. Objectives This study assessed long-term effectiveness and determinants of sustained optimal control over three years of MiniMed™ 780G use in young individuals with type 1 diabetes. Methods In this real-world, longitudinal multicenter study, 359 participants (median age 12.2 years; 50.9% female) from 20 Italian pediatric centers were followed for 3 years after MiniMed™ 780G initiation. Glucose outcomes, insulin delivery patterns, and system settings were evaluated at 1, 2, and 3 years. Trends over time were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models, and predictors of achieving time in tight range (TITR ≥50%) at 3 years were identified through multivariable logistic regression. Results Median time in range (TIR) remained within recommended targets, with a slight decline from 75% at year 1 to 74% at year 3 (p=0.002). Automated correction boluses progressively increased, while user-initiated boluses and carbohydrate entries decreased (p<0.001). Participants with higher 1-year TIR showed a gradual decline over time alongside a greater rise in automated corrections (interaction p<0.001) (Figure 1). At 3 years, greater SmartGuard use (OR 1.12, p=0.008), optimized system settings (OR 2.99, p=0.013), and fewer automated corrections (OR 0.85, p<0.001) independently predicted TITR ≥50%. Conclusions MiniMed™ 780G maintains effective glycemic control over three years. However, increasing dependence on automation and reduced user engagement may limit optimal outcomes, underscoring the importance of continuous education and device optimization.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Passanisi et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: