Globally, diabetes mellitus (DM) is a substantial contributor to morbidity and mortality. Comorbidities and intercurrent illnesses in people with diabetes may necessitate the use of steroids. Acute as well as chronic use of steroids contributes substantially to the development of various complications. Despite this, there are no standard guidelines or consensus to provide a unified approach for the rational use of steroids in people with diabetes. Also, there is scant harmonization among clinicians with the use of different steroids in routine practice. To address the inconsistencies in this clinical arena, the consensus working group (CWG) formulated a unified consensus for steroid use in people with diabetes. In people with diabetes, the use of steroids causes hyperglycemia and may precipitate diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). An increase in weight is directly related to the dose and duration of the steroid therapy. Steroid-related alterations in hyperglycemia, dyslipidemia, and hypertension (HTN) add to the increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease. The risk of complications such as infections, osteoporosis, myopathy, acne, cataracts, and glaucoma may increase with the use of steroids. Appropriate and timely monitoring of these complications is necessary for early detection and treatment of such complications. Given the systemic effects of various antihyperglycemic drugs, there is a possibility of aggravating or diminishing the specific complications. Preference to a safer steroid is required matching the steroid dose equivalence and individualizing patient management. In conclusion, short-, intermediate-, or long-term use of steroids in people with diabetes demands their rational use and holistic approach to identify, monitor, and treat the complications induced or aggravated by the steroids.

In the US, approximately 11% of the population have diagnosed diabetes and nearly 40% have prediabetes. In addition, chronic kidney disease (CKD) affects 14% of the US population including up to 40% of those with diabetes. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains the leading cause of death worldwide where it affects approximately half of adults. The presence of CKD or diabetes doubles the risk of cardiovascular events. When both CKD and diabetes occur in the same patient the risks are further increased. The clinical problems of hypertension, hyperglycemia, and hyperlipidemia are all closely related with obesity, metabolic syndrome, Type 2 diabetes, CKD, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis. The increasing frequency of obesity has driven increases in all of these medical comorbidities. These conditions frequently cluster together in the same patient exacerbating the risk of morbidity and mortality. They are also associated with cognitive dysfunction/dementia, pulmonary diseases, cancers, gastrointestinal diseases, immune system abnormalities, and inflammatory disorders. Only 6.8% of adults in US meet all targets for cardiovascular risk management with significant disparities based on race and ethnicity. Given the complexity of these multisystem problems in people with diabetes and obesity, it would seem reasonable to attempt to diagnose and treat many of the comorbidities earlier in the course of disease rather than wait for substantial end organ dysfunction to occur. The American Diabetes Association (ADA) has recently published a consensus statement recommending early screening for the diagnosis of heart failure, CKD and diabetes, recognizing both the frequency and gravity of this combination. Likewise, there are recommendations in the guidelines to facilitate screening for microalbuminuria, blood pressure, glycemic control and lipids earlier in patients at risk rather than wait and treat as a secondary prevention program. Thus, the general principle is to facilitate earlier recognition and diagnosis and provide treatment before downstream target organ complications occur. This review will focus on CVD and risk management based on newest recommendations and standards of care in people with diabetes by the ADA. The main considerations in the treatment of people with diabetes are glycemic control, blood pressure, lipids, and the use of medications with proven cardiorenal disease progression capability to prevent or delay.

Despite advances in systemic care, diabetic disease of the eye (DDE) remains the leading cause of blindness worldwide. There is a critical gap of up-to-date, evidence-based guidance for ophthalmologists in Canada that includes evidence from recent randomized controlled trials. Previous guidance has not always given special consideration to applying treatments and managing DDE in the context of the healthcare system. This consensus statement aims to assist practitioners in the field by providing a spectrum of acceptable opinions on DDE treatment and management from recognized experts in the field. In compiling evidence and generating consensus, a working group of retinal specialists in Canada addressed clinical questions surrounding the four themes of disease, patient, management, and collaboration. The working group reviewed literature representing the highest level of evidence on DDE and shared their opinions on topics surrounding the epidemiology and pathophysiology of diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema; diagnosis and monitoring; considerations around diabetes medication use; strategic considerations for management given systemic comorbidities, ocular comorbidities, and pregnancy; treatment goals and modalities for diabetic macular edema, non-proliferative and proliferative diabetic retinopathy, and retinal detachment; and interdisciplinary collaboration. Ultimately, this work highlighted that the retinal examination in DDE not only informs the treating ophthalmologist but can serve as a global index for disease progression across many tissues of the body. It highlighted further that DDE can be treated regardless of diabetic control, that a systemic approach to patient care will result in the best health outcomes, and prevention of visual complications requires a multidisciplinary management approach. Ophthalmologists must tailor their clinical approach to the needs and circumstances of individual patients and work within the realities of their healthcare setting.

The American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes consensus statement 2022 effectively captures the changing paradigm of modern diabetes care. As emphasized in the guidelines, a person-centered decision cycle focusing on preventing complications and improving quality of life is the driving principle behind modern diabetes management. Other notable features of the document are its emphasis on self-management education, therapeutic behaviour, sleep hygiene, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and weight loss. Focus on individualization of care, social determinants of health, and ethnic variations are pertinent from an Afro-Asian perspective. The \"language matters\" section is a welcome addition that will help to overcome several barriers in diabetes care.

Diabetes-related foot disease (DFD) - foot ulcers, infection, ischaemia - is a leading cause of hospitalisation, disability, and health care costs in Australia. The previous 2011 Australian guideline for DFD was outdated. We developed new Australian evidence-based guidelines for DFD by systematically adapting suitable international guidelines to the Australian context using the ADAPTE and GRADE approaches recommended by the NHMRC.
This article summarises the most relevant of the 98 recommendations made across six new guidelines for the general medical audience, including: prevention - screening, education, self-care, footwear, and treatments to prevent DFD; classification - classifications systems for ulcers, infection, ischaemia and auditing; peripheral artery disease (PAD) - examinations and imaging for diagnosis, severity classification, and treatments; infection - examinations, cultures, imaging and inflammatory markers for diagnosis, severity classification, and treatments; offloading - pressure offloading treatments for different ulcer types and locations; and wound healing - debridement, wound dressing selection principles and wound treatments for non-healing ulcers.
For people without DFD, key changes include using a new risk stratification system for screening, categorising risk and managing people at increased risk of DFD. For those categorised at increased risk of DFD, more specific self-monitoring, footwear prescription, surgical treatments, and activity management practices to prevent DFD have been recommended. For people with DFD, key changes include using new ulcer, infection and PAD classification systems for assessing, documenting and communicating DFD severity. These systems also inform more specific PAD, infection, pressure offloading, and wound healing management recommendations to resolve DFD.

BACKGROUND: Current international guidelines recommend a pre-Ramadan risk assessment for people with diabetes (PwDM) who plan on fasting during the Holy month. However, a comprehensive risk assessment-based recommendation for the management of PwDM intending to fast is still controversial. Therefore, the Arabic Association for the Study of Diabetes and Metabolism (AASD) developed this consensus to provide further insights into risk stratification in PwDM intending to fast during Ramadan.
METHODS: The present consensus was based on the three-step modified Delphi method. The modified Delphi method is based on a series of voting rounds and in-between meetings of the expert panel to reach agreements on the statements that did not reach the consensus level during voting. The panel group comprised professors and consultants in endocrinology (both adult and pediatric). Other members included experts in the fields of cardiovascular medicine, nephrology, ophthalmology, and vascular surgery, affiliated with academic institutions in Egypt.
RESULTS: In PwDM who intend to fast during Ramadan, risk stratification is crucial to optimize patient outcomes and prevent serious complications. The present consensus provides risk assessment of those living with diabetes according to several factors, including the type of diabetes, presence, and severity of complications, number of fasting hours, and other socioeconomic factors. According to their risk factors, patients were classified into four categories (very high, high, moderate, and low risk).
CONCLUSIONS: Future research is warranted due to the controversial literature regarding the impact of fasting on certain comorbidities.

The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology (AACE) 2022 guideline provides comprehensive and evidence-based guidance on contemporary diabetes management. The statement reiterates the importance of person-centred, team-based care for optimum outcomes. The recent strides to prevent cardiovascular and renal complications have been aptly incorporated. The recommendations on virtual care, continuous glucose monitors, cancer screening, infertility and mental health are relevant. However, focused discussions on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and geriatric diabetes care could have been helpful. Outlining targets for prediabetes care is a notable addition and is likely to be the most effective strategy in addressing the rising burden of diabetes.

We reviewed recent guidelines on the management of heart failure (HF) in patients with diabetes. Major recommendations in European and US society guidelines were scrutinized. First, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors are now recommended treatments for all patients with symptomatic HF (stage C and D; New York Heart Association class II-IV), irrespective of the presence of type 2 diabetes and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Second, patients with HF and reduced EF (LVEF ≤40%) should have foundational therapies from four drug classes (sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor, beta-blocker and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist). Third, patients with HF with mildly reduced (41%-49%) and preserved (≥50%) LVEF may also benefit from angiotensin-receptor neprilysin inhibitor, beta-blocker and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist therapy, although evidence for these is less robust. Fourth, selected patients should be considered for other therapies such as diuretics (if congestion), anticoagulation (if atrial fibrillation) and cardiac device therapy. Fifth, glucose-lowering therapies such as thiazolidinediones and certain dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (such as saxagliptin and alogliptin) should be avoided in patients with HF. Sixth, guidelines recommend enrolment of patients with HF into exercise rehabilitation and multidisciplinary HF management programmes. Particular attention should be paid to important comorbidities such as obesity, alongside pharmacological therapies. As diabetes and obesity are major risk factors for HF, earlier consideration of, and diagnosis of HF, followed by guideline-directed medical therapy can meaningfully improve patients\' lives. Diabetes doctors would do well to understand the basics of such guidelines to help improve all aspects of HF diagnosis and care.

暂无摘要。

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of mortality in individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Cardiovascular risk management is therefore essential in the management of individuals with T1DM. This study describes the performance of lipid and blood pressure management in individuals with T1DM using three guidelines.
Individuals ≥18 years with T1DM, treated with insulin for ≥1 year, visiting Diabeter or the University Medical Center Groningen between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2018, were included. Lipid and blood pressure management were examined using the Dutch, American Diabetes Association (ADA) and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. Concordance of recommended and prescribed lipid-lowering (LLM) or antihypertensive medication (AHM) was assessed per guideline and 10-year age groups. Achievement of treatment targets was assessed for those prescribed medication.
A total of 1855 individuals with T1DM were included. LLM and AHM was prescribed in 19% and 17%, respectively. In individuals recommended LLM, this was prescribed in 22%-46% according to Dutch, ADA or NICE guideline recommendations. For individuals recommended AHM, this was prescribed in 52%-75%. Recommended and actual prescription of LLM and AHM increased over age for all three guidelines. However, discordance between treatment recommendation and medication prescribed was higher in younger, compared with older, age groups. Low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol targets were achieved by 50% (without CVD) and 31% (with CVD) of those prescribed LLM. The blood pressure target was achieved by 46% of those prescribed AHM.
This study suggests that there is undertreatment of lipid and blood pressure according to guideline recommendations, particularly in younger age groups. Treatment targets are not met by most individuals prescribed medication, while guidelines recommendations differ considerably. We recommend to investigate the factors influencing undertreatment of lipid and blood pressure management in individuals with T1DM.