There is some evidence to suggest that CSII may be better than MI for glycaemic control in people with type 1 diabetes. Non-severe hypoglycaemic events do not appear to be reduced with CSII. There is insufficient evidence regarding adverse events, mortality, morbidity and costs.
Comparison of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion with multiple insulin injections using the NovoPen.
Twenty-one patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) participated in a 20-week randomized cross-over comparison of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) with intensified conventional treatment (ICT) using the NovoPen. The Medix or the Auto-Syringe pumps were used for CSII and, during ICT with NovoPen, conventional plastic syringes were used for injections of intermediate-acting insulin at bedtime. At entry HbA1c, was 8.7 +/- 0.4% (mean +/- SE) in CSII patients and 8.8 +/- 0.5% in the ICF group. HbA1c declined significantly in both groups (ICT 7.6 +/- 0.2%; CSII 7.6 +/- 0.2%) though there was no significant difference between the responses. Overall mean blood glucose was slightly but significantly lower during CSII than during ICT (CSII: 7.6 +/- 0.2 mmol/l; ICT: 8.7 +/- 0.4 mmol/l, p less than 0.05). The number of hypoglycaemic episodes did not differ significantly between patients treated with NovoPen and CSII. At the end of the study, a questionnaire revealed that all but one patient preferred ICT with NovoPen to conventional therapy. Given the choice for future treatment, 6 patients chose CSII, 12 patients preferred ICT with NovoPen and 1 was unsure.