BackgroundTo evaluate the characteristics of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients with or without chronic kidney disease (CKD) in Germany.MethodsUsing combined DPV/DIVE registry data, the analysis included patients with T2DM at least ≥ 18 years old who had an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) value available. CKD was defined as an eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 or eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and albuminuria (≥ 30 mg/g). Median values of the most recent treatment year per patient are reported.ResultsAmong 343,675 patients with T2DM 171,930 had CKD. Patients with CKD had a median eGFR of 48.9 mL/min/1.73 m2 and 51.2% had a urinary albumin level ≥ 30 mg/g. They were older, had a longer diabetes duration and a higher proportion was females compared to patients without CKD (all p < 0.001). More than half of CKD patients (53.5%) were receiving long-acting insulin-based therapy versus around 39.1% of those without (p < 0.001). CKD patients also had a higher rate of hypertension (79.4% vs 72.0%; p < 0.001). The most common antihypertensive drugs among CKD patients were renin-angiotensin-aldosteron system inhibitors (angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors 33.8%, angiotensin receptor blockers 14.2%) and diuretics (40.2%). CKD patients had a higher rate of dyslipidemia (88.4% vs 86.3%) with higher triglyceride levels (157.9 vs 151.0 mg/dL) and lower HDL-C levels (men: 40.0 vs 42.0 mg/dL; women: 46.4 vs 50.0 mg/dL) (all p < 0.001) and a higher rate of hyperkalemia (> 5.5 mmol/L: 3.7% vs. 1.0%). Comorbidities were more common among CKD patients (p < 0.001).ConclusionThe results illustrate the prevalence and morbidity burden associated with diabetic kidney disease in patients with T2DM in Germany. The data call for more attention to the presence of chronic kidney disease in patients with diabetes, should trigger intensified risk factor control up and beyond the control of blood glucose and HbA1c in these patients. They may also serve as a trigger for future investigations into this patient population asking for new treatment options to be developed.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12933-019-0837-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Background: An understanding of the current status of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) can help to provide appropriate treatment. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of the DIabetes Versorgungs-Evaluation (DIVE) and the Diabetes-Patienten-Verlaufsdokumentation (DPV) databases for Germany. Results: The analysis included 56,250 people with T1DM (54.2% male), a median age of 36.8 years, and a median diabetes duration of 12.4 years. 15.3% were obese (body mass index ≥ 30kg/m 2 ). Long-acting insulin analogs were used by 53.3%, short-acting analogs by 72.1%, and oral antidiabetic drugs by 4.7%. Patients had a median glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) of 7.8%. There was a drop in HbA1c and an increase in the rate of hypertension, oral antidiabetic drug use, and in the rate of severe hypoglycemia (all p < 0.01) with age. Flash glucose monitoring (FGM) showed the best glucose values with fewer complications compared to other monitoring systems. HbA1c and FBG were lower in patients using a pump versus multiple daily injections (MDIs; 7.7 versus 7.9% and 7.8 versus 8.7 mmol/l; all adjusted p < 0.01). Patients had a lower risk of at least one severe hypoglycemic or DKA episode during the most recent treatment year with pump treatment compared to MDI (9.4% versus 10.5% and 4.7% versus 6.1%, both adjusted p < 0.01). Conclusion: The data demonstrated less-than-optimal glycemic control in the young, an increasing metabolic pattern in T1DM with increasing age, a benefit of FGM to improve HbA1c control and adverse effects, as well as benefits of pump treatment over MDIs.

Background: The clinical profile differs between old and young patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). We explored, based on a large real-world database, patient and disease characteristics and actual treatment patterns by age. Methods: The analysis was based on the DIVE and DPV registries of patients with T2DM. Patients were analyzed by age groups 50–59 (middle-young), 60–69 (young-old), 70–79 (middle-old), 80–89 (old), and 90 years or more (oldest-old). Results: A total of 396,719 patients were analyzed, of which 17.7% were 50–59 years, 27.7% 60–69 years, 34.3% 70–79 years, 18.3% 80–89 years and 2.0% at least 90 years. We found that (a) T2DM in old and oldest-old patients was characterized much less by the presence of metabolic risk factors such as hypertension, obesity, dyslipidemia and smoking than in younger patients; (b) the HbA1c was much lower in oldest-old than in middle-young patients (7.2 ± 1.6% versus 8.0 ± 2.2%; p < 0.001), but it was associated with higher proportions of patients with severe hypoglycemia (7.0 versus 1.6%; p < 0.001); (c) this was potentially associated with the higher and increasing rates of insulin use in older patients (from 17.6% to 37.6%, p < 0.001) and the particular comorbidity profile of these patients, for example, chronic kidney disease (CKD); (d) patients with late diabetes onset had lower HbA1c values, lower bodyweight and less cardiovascular risk factors; (e) patients with a longer diabetes duration had a considerable increase in macrovascular and even more microvascular complications. Conclusion: In very old patients there is a need for frequent careful routine assessment and a tailored pharmacotherapy in which patient safety is much more important than blood-glucose-lowering efficacy.

Background: An understanding of the current status of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) can help to provide appropriate treatment. Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of the DIabetes Versorgungs-Evaluation (DIVE) and the Diabetes-Patienten-Verlaufsdokumentation (DPV) databases for Germany. Results: The analysis included 56,250 people with T1DM (54.2% male), a median age of 36.8 years, and a median diabetes duration of 12.4 years. 15.3% were obese (body mass index ≥ 30kg/m 2 ). Long-acting insulin analogs were used by 53.3%, short-acting analogs by 72.1%, and oral antidiabetic drugs by 4.7%. Patients had a median glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) of 7.8%. There was a drop in HbA1c and an increase in the rate of hypertension, oral antidiabetic drug use, and in the rate of severe hypoglycemia (all p < 0.01) with age. Flash glucose monitoring (FGM) showed the best glucose values with fewer complications compared to other monitoring systems. HbA1c and FBG were lower in patients using a pump versus multiple daily injections (MDIs; 7.7 versus 7.9% and 7.8 versus 8.7 mmol/l; all adjusted p < 0.01). Patients had a lower risk of at least one severe hypoglycemic or DKA episode during the most recent treatment year with pump treatment compared to MDI (9.4% versus 10.5% and 4.7% versus 6.1%, both adjusted p < 0.01). Conclusion:The data demonstrated less-than-optimal glycemic control in the young, an increasing metabolic pattern in T1DM with increasing age, a benefit of FGM to improve HbA1c control and adverse effects, as well as benefits of pump treatment over MDIs.

No abstract