This article explores the results of 780g medtronic use by European and Chilean patients. It also looks at differences in glycemic control between in-clinic and remote initiation programs and the costs of initiation programs. Although Medtronic is not the AID leader yet, it is quickly catching up.
Results from European and Chilean users of 780g medtronic
Medtronic has presented results from European and Chilean users of the 780G hybrid closed loop insulin pump system. The device has improved patients' ability to maintain target blood glucose levels. The MiniMed 780G system uses a Guardian 4 glucose sensor, which provides a continuous glucose reading every five minutes. It is approved in more than 40 countries, including the U.S.
Results from European and Chilean users of the MiniMed 780G system showed that it reduced the number of SmartGuard exits and fingersticks, while maintaining favorable glycemic outcomes. The device has been approved in over 40 countries and is currently undergoing FDA review.
Despite these results, Medtronic has continued to face controversy regarding its safety. Roope Kauppi's parents have been sending the device to the company for testing. Currently, her parents are awaiting the results. Medtronic executives recently spoke at a Goldman Sachs conference in Rancho Palos Verdes, California, and were asked about the company's product pipeline.
While Medtronic is not responsible for injuries or deaths, it is a company that relies on large revenues to stay in business. The company is a global leader in medical technology, and its products improve the lives of more than 70 million patients each year. In fact, two lives are saved every second by Medtronic devices.
While Medtronic has pledged to be transparent, it has also been accused of misconduct and illegal behavior. In China, a Medtronic unit was fined $17 million after a probe by the country's regulatory authority. It was found that the company imposed minimum prices for its products in China, and this resulted in stifling competition and keeping prices high.
In the United States, Medtronic has faced challenges with the U.S. government and faced controversy over payments to doctors. Two years later, it was targeted by the Senate over improper payments to doctors. The company replaced Hawkins with Omar Ishrak, a Bangladesh-born engineer with experience in the health care industry. Ishrak aimed to focus on creating new, less expensive ways to treat patients, and new business models. He also said that the company would boost international sales in emerging markets. Despite the problems, the company refocused on delivering better, less expensive care.
Comparison of glycemic control between remote initiation and in clinic initiation
The authors declare that they have received personal fees from Dexcom and Eli Lilly, grants from Medtronic and Bigfoot BioMedical, and nonfinancial support from the companies mentioned. Drs Weinstock and Clements have received grants from Insulet, Dexcom, and Medtronic and received study supplies from Bigfoot Biomedical. Dr Laffel has received personal fees from Dexcom and Eli-Lilly.
The study was sponsored by the Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust. The Jaeb Center for Health Research received non-financial support from Dexcom Inc. Both companies supplied continuous glucose monitoring devices and sensors to participants.
The study was limited by its short duration. A longer study would be useful to confirm the results and allow optimization of the active insulin time settings. A longer study may also lead to a higher TIR. The study population was older, reflecting a challenging demographic. Nevertheless, the design and randomization of the study mitigate the limitations.
A 24-hour ambulatory glucose profile is presented in Fig. 1. The AHCL group was more closely associated with a lower median and lower interquartile range, suggesting reduced glycemic variability. The AHCL group received 0.76 +/ 0.28 units of insulin per kg per day, a greater percentage of autocorrection, and a lower coefficient of variation.
MiniMed Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop system is equipped with a glycemic control algorithm that includes individualized basal target set points and an automated correction bolus feature. A recent study compared this device to sensor-augmented pump therapy with predictive low glucose management, and the MiniMed Advanced Hybrid Closed-loop system was conducted in type 1 diabetes patients. The study included patients aged between seven and eighty.
Although the study had some limitations, it is important to note that it was designed as a multicentre crossover study comparing in clinic and remote medtronic initiation. It included patients from three centres in the UK and one in Austria. It also recruited from outpatient clinics.
Cost of initiation program
Medtronic plc, a leading global company in healthcare technology, has launched the ADAPT study, the first multinational randomized controlled trial of the MiniMed(tm) 780G glucose monitoring system. The study evaluated the MiniMed 780G system in patients with diabetes compared to the standard of care of multiple daily injections plus continuous glucose monitoring. The study involved 82 participants who all had suboptimal HbA1C levels.
Medtronic has data on file comparing its MiniMed(tm) 780G system with the Guardian(tm) sensor 3 and MiniMed(tm) Quick Set. However, the information is not intended to be a substitute for the advice of a physician. Patients should always discuss the risks and benefits of any new treatment with their physicians.
Recent Post
