P-257: Cross-over study of two commercial automated insulin delivery systems based on tubed insulin pumps in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes – the AMICA study
S Seget, A Chobot, M Tarasiewicz, E Ledwoń, J Dorczak, B Drygała, J Polańska, P Jarosz-ChobotAbstract
Introduction
In Poland, two automated insulin delivery (AID) systems are currently reimbursed for individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D): MiniMed 780G (780G) and CamAPS FX used with mylife YpsoPump (CamAPS FX).
Objectives
The aim of this study was to compare glycemic outcomes in children and adolescents treated with these two systems.
Methods
Nineteen children and adolescents with T1D were enrolled in this crossover study (age 12.82 ± 4.08 years; diabetes duration 5.91 ± 3.69 years, HbA1c 7.1± 0.7% ). Before enrollment, 10 participants were using 780G and 9 were using CamAPS FX. Following structured education, participants switched to the alternative AID system for 12 weeks. Subsequently, after re-education, they returned to their original therapy and were followed for an additional 12 weeks. Only data collected during automated mode were included in the analysis. Glycemic control parameters were assessed using reports generated from insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems.
Results
No significant differences were observed between the two systems in mean glucose levels, glucose management indicator, time in range (70–180 mg/dL), time below 54 mg/dL, sensor usage, or percentage of time spent in automated mode – most patients achieved recommended glycemic targets. However, the coefficient of variation was significantly lower during treatment with 780G compared with CamAPS FX (36.95% ± 4.25% vs. 40.00% ± 4.86%; p = 0.004).
Conclusions
In the studied patients key CGM metrics were comparable between the two investigated AID systems except for lower glucose variability associated with the use of the MiniMed 780G system.