Bakgrund: Diabetes mellitus typ II (DMT2) är ett folkhälsoproblem som har ökat i hela värden och cirka 422 miljoner människor är drabbade av sjukdomen. I Sverige har ungefär 500 000 människor DMT2. Egenvård är en viktig del av behandlingen.  Syfte: Att beskriva patienters upplevelser av egenvård vid diabetes mellitus typ II. Metod: En litteraturöversikt baserad på tio kvalitativa vetenskapliga artiklar, från databaserna Cinhal Complete och PubMed. Litteraturöversikten har analyserats med utgångspunkt i Fribergs modell. Resultat: Resultatet presenteras i tre huvudteman: “Nya levnadsvanor”, “Behov av stöd” och “Kunskap och information”. Sammanfattning: Många patienter upplevde att det var en utmaning att utföra egenvård då det innebär mycket uppoffring, kunskap, motivation och stöd vid egenvård. / Background: Diabetes mellitus type II (DMT2) is a public health problem that has increased throughout the world. Around 422 million people worldwide are affected by the disease. In Sweden, there are approximately 500,000 people who have a DMT2 diagnosis. Self-Care is an important part of the treatment. Aim: To describe patients' experiences of self-care in type II diabetes mellitus.Method:A literature review based on ten qualitative scientific articles, retrieved from the databases Cinhal complete and PubMed. The literature review has been analyzed on the basis of Friberg's model.  Results: The results are presented in three main themes: "New lifestyles", "Need for support" and "Knowledge and information".  Summary: Many patients felt that it was a challenge to perform self-care as it involves a lot of sacrifice, knowledge, motivation, and support in self-care.

In the United States alone, there were 25.8 million people suffering from diabetes in 2010. The prevalence of diabetes is expected to markedly increase worldwide over the next 30 years, an estimated 2.8% in 2000 and 4.4% in 2030. For individuals diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), treatment is essential to control adverse effects such as hypertension and diabetic neuropathy. The focus of this study is to examine various approaches to maintain and improve the lifestyle of individuals suffering from T2DM. A comparative approach has been used to evaluate the differences in the treatment of T2DM with the use of traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) and Western medicine. In Western society, pharmaceuticals are commonly used as a treatment method to manage hyperglycemia, along with life-style modifications. Furthermore, TCM views the human body and its functioning in a holistic way, stating that no single body part or symptom can be understood apart from its relation to a whole. Herbal medications and other treatments in TCM are targeted to treat underlying medical complaints that resulted in symptoms, instead of treating one specific manifestation. Data collection has been gathered through Qualitative over the phone interviews with patients suffering from T2DM, as well as TCM physicians. Interviews were conducted on patients that were diagnosed with T2DM (fasting plasma glucose levels of 126 or greater and HbAlc levels [greater than] 8%), and had continued treatment longer than three months prior to interviews. Collection of chart notes containing glucose levels, levels of pain, lifestyle changes, and vital signs were also used. A total of 21 patients from a family practice were interviewed, answering 23 constructed questions based on treatment of choice (TCM or western) and their personal input on treatment satisfaction. Patients varied in age, ethnicities, and gender, ranging from 39-70 years of age. Two traditional Chinese medicine physicians were also interviewed. Interviews with TCM physicians elaborated on course of treatment and steps taken to diagnose T2DM. Furthermore, prescription medications were also charted and documented to further analyze with secondary data. Upon completing the interviews, the data stated 21 patients (total population questioned) had not experienced alternative medicine and were exposed only to western medicine as treatment. A major concern for most patients were the pharmaceutical side effects, and 85.1% of patients stated they would be interested in an alternative treatment. Due to insufficient sources and knowledge on TCM treatment, 14.2% of patients stated they were satisfied with their western medicine treatment of choice and would not change treatment. The research's objective was to evaluate the differences in treatment of T2DM. Data collected supported the objective and showed the lack of sources to alternative treatments aside from western medicine. The researcher informed and educated interviewees about literature review on traditional Chinese medicine about alternative treatments available to treat T2DM.

O carvedilol é um anti-hipertensivo disponível na clínica como mistura racêmica, sendo o (S)-(-)-carvedilol um bloqueador ? e ?1-adrenérgico e o (R)-(+)-carvedilol apenas ?1-adrenérgico. O carvedilol é metabolizado principalmente por glicuronidação e pelo CYP2D6 a hidroxifenilcarvedilol e pelo CYP2C9 a Odesmetilcarvedilol. O presente estudo avalia a disposição cinética e o metabolismo dos enantiômeros do carvedilol, hidroxifenilcarvedilol e O-desmetilcarvedilol em voluntários sadios não comedicados (n=13) ou comedicados com dose única oral de glibenclamida (5 mg) e metformina (500 mg) (n=13) e em pacientes portadores de diabetes mellitus tipo 2 (com bom controle glicêmico e em tratamento com glibenclamida 5 mg/8h e metformina 500 mg/8h; n=14), fenotipados como metabolizadores rápidos (n=26) ou lentos (n=1). Os voluntários e pacientes receberam dose única oral de 25 mg de carvedilol racêmico e amostras seriadas de sangue foram coletadas até 24h após a administração. A frequência cardíaca foi avaliada na situação de exercício isométrico com o handgrip durante 2 min a 30% da contratilidade voluntária máxima e durante o repouso. Os enantiômeros do carvedilol e metabólitos foram analisados em plasma por LC-MS/MS empregando coluna Chirobiotic® V. O método foi linear no intervalo de 0,05 a 100; 0,05 a 10 e 0,02 a 10 ng/mL para os enantiômeros do carvedilol, hidroxifenilcarvedilol e O-desmetilcarvedilol, os desvios do estudo de precisão e exatidão foram inferiores a 15% e não foi observado efeito matriz. A farmacocinética avaliada por modelo não compartimental mostra acúmulo plasmático dos enantiômeros (R)-(+)-carvedilol, (R)-(+)-O-desmetilcarvedilol e (R)-(+)- hidroxifenilcarvedilol. A disposição cinética e o metabolismo dos enantiômeros do carvedilol não diferem entre os grupos de voluntários não comedicados e comedicados com dose única oral de glibenclamida e metformina. No entanto, os valores de AUC de ambos os enantiômeros do metabólito O-desmetilcarvedilol [(R)- (+): 6,92 vs 10,40 vs 11,91 ng.h/mL e (S)-(-): 2,36 vs 4,26 vs 3,98 ng/h/mL] são menores no grupo de pacientes portadores de diabetes mellitus tipo 2 quando comparados ao grupo de voluntários sadios não comedicados ou comedicados. Em compensação, os valores de AUC de ambos os enantiômeros do metabólito hidroxifenilcarvedilol [(R)-(+): 13,89 vs 6,60 vs 4,88 ng.h/mL e (S)-(-): 7,21 vs 1,50 vs 1,45 ng/h/mL] são maiores no grupo de pacientes portadores de diabetes mellitus tipo 2. Os parâmetros farmacocinéticos de um paciente metabolizador lento do CYP2D6, portador de diabetes mellitus tipo 2 e em tratamento com glibenclamida e metformina, permite inferir redução na formação de ambos os enantiômeros do metabólito hidroxifenilcarvedilol compensada pelo aumento na formação de ambos os enantiômeros do metabólito O-desmetilcarvedilol. Logo, a disposição cinética de ambos os enantiômeros do carvedilol sob a forma inalterada não difere entre metabolizadores rápidos e lentos do CYP2D6. O modelo não linear de efeitos mistos para a análise da disposição cinética e metabolismo populacional dos enantiômeros do carvedilol foi desenvolvido no NONMEM v.7.2 é preciso e possui capacidade preditiva adequada avaliada por métodos visuais do ajuste do modelo aos dados e ii bootstrap. Os valores de biodisponibilidade estimados pelo modelo para os enantiômeros (S)-(-) e (R)-(+)-carvedilol, respectivamente 16,43 e 25,4%, não diferem entre voluntários sadios e pacientes portadores de diabetes mellitus tipo 2 em tratamento com glibenclamida e metformina. Os valores de clearance pelo CYP2D6 estimados para o (S)-(-)-carvedilol foram de 1,65 vs 7,28 L/h, respectivamente, para os voluntários sadios e para os pacientes diabéticos, enquanto os estimados para o enantiômero (R)-(+)-carvedilol foram de 2,69 vs 13,7 L/h. Em relação ao clearance pelo CYP2C9, os valores estimados para o (S)-(-)-carvedilol foram de 16,2 vs 7,71 L/h, respectivamente, para os voluntários sadios e para os pacientes diabéticos, enquanto os estimados para o enantiômero (R)-(+)-carvedilol foram de 25,6 vs 10,5 L/h. Os valores de clearance por outras vias metabólicas são maiores para o (S)-(-)- carvedilol do que para o (R)-(+)-carvedilol (28,2 vs 4,86 L/h) e não diferem entre voluntários sadios e pacientes. Os valores de clearance total de ambos os enantiômeros do carvedilol não diferem entre os voluntários sadios e os pacientes portadores de diabetes mellitus tipo 2 [(S)-(-): 46,05 vs 43,19 L/h e (R)-(+): 33,15 vs 29,06 L/h], considerando que os menores clearances do CYP2C9 são compensados por maiores clearances do CYP2D6. A variação da frequência cardíaca induzida pelo exercício isométrico com o handgrip após a administração de dose única oral de 25 mg de carvedilol racêmico não mostra relação com as concentrações plasmáticas do (S)-(-)-carvedilol. / Carvedilol is an antihypertensive available as racemic mixture, the (S)-(-)- carvedilol is a ??and ?1 adrenergic blocker and (R)-(+)-carvedilol is only na ?1- adrenergic blocker. Carvedilol is metabolized primarily by glucuronidation and by CYP2D6 to hidroxifenilcarvedilol and CYP2C9 to O-desmetilcarvedilol. This study evaluates the disposition and metabolism of carvedilol, hidroxyphenilcarvedilol and Odesmethylcarvedilol enantiomers in health (n=13) and type II diabetes subjects treated with glibenclamide (5 mg/8h) and in a good glycemic control (n=13) and in a CYP2D6 poor metabolizer diabetes subject (n=1). The subjects received a single racemic carvedilol dose of 25 mg. blood samples wore collected until 24h. The heart rate was evaluated durig isometric handgrip exercise. Carvedilol and metabolites enantiomers wore evaluated in plasma sampels by LC-MS/MS. The pharmacokinetics was evaluate by noncompartimental model and higher levels of (R)-(+)-carvedilol, (R)-(+)-Odesmethylcarvedilol e (R)-(+)-hidroxiphenilcarvedilol levels are noticed. The carvedilol pharmacokinetics does not change between healthy and type II diabetes subjects. However the AUC values of both O-desmethylcarvedilol enantiomers are lower [(R)-(+): 6,92 vs 10,40 vs 11,91 ng.h/mL e (S)-(-): 2,36 vs 4,26 vs 3,98 ng/h/mL]in the diabetes subjects and the AUC values of both hidroxyphenilcarvedilol enantiomers are higher [(R)-(+): 13,89 vs 6,60 vs 4,88 ng.h/mL e (S)-(-): 7,21 vs 1,50 vs 1,45 ng/h/mL]. It is noticed in CYP2D6 poor metabolizer diabetes subject lower levels of hidroxyphenilcarvedilol but higher of O-desmetilcarvedilol and carvedilol disposition is not changed. A Non-linear mixed effects modelling was performed in NONMEM v.7.2 the model was validated by visual methods and bootstrap. The bioavailability of (S)-(-) and (R)-(+)-carvedilol was 16,43 e 25,4% and no covariate effect was noticed. The CYP2D6 clearance values were 1,65 vs 7,28 L/h to healthy and diabetes subjects, inasmuch (R)-(+)-carvedilol ones were 25,6 vs 10,5 L/h. The CYP2C9 clearance of (S)-(-)-carvedilol were 16,2 vs 7,71 L/h for healthy and diabetes subjects, while (R)- (+)-carvedilol ones were 25,6 vs 10,5 L/h. The (S)-(-)-carvedilol clearance by other metabolic routes are higher (28,2 vs 4,86 L/h) and does not change between healthy and diabetes subjects. Carvedilol total clearance also does not differ between healthy and diabetes subjects the because the lower CYP2C9 clearance are balanced by the higher CYP2D6 clearance. The cardiac frequency change induced by handgrip isometric exercise is not related with the (S)-(-)-carvedilol plasma levels.

O carvedilol é um anti-hipertensivo disponível na clínica como mistura racêmica, sendo o (S)-(-)-carvedilol um bloqueador ? e ?1-adrenérgico e o (R)-(+)-carvedilol apenas ?1-adrenérgico. O carvedilol é metabolizado principalmente por glicuronidação e pelo CYP2D6 a hidroxifenilcarvedilol e pelo CYP2C9 a Odesmetilcarvedilol. O presente estudo avalia a disposição cinética e o metabolismo dos enantiômeros do carvedilol, hidroxifenilcarvedilol e O-desmetilcarvedilol em voluntários sadios não comedicados (n=13) ou comedicados com dose única oral de glibenclamida (5 mg) e metformina (500 mg) (n=13) e em pacientes portadores de diabetes mellitus tipo 2 (com bom controle glicêmico e em tratamento com glibenclamida 5 mg/8h e metformina 500 mg/8h; n=14), fenotipados como metabolizadores rápidos (n=26) ou lentos (n=1). Os voluntários e pacientes receberam dose única oral de 25 mg de carvedilol racêmico e amostras seriadas de sangue foram coletadas até 24h após a administração. A frequência cardíaca foi avaliada na situação de exercício isométrico com o handgrip durante 2 min a 30% da contratilidade voluntária máxima e durante o repouso. Os enantiômeros do carvedilol e metabólitos foram analisados em plasma por LC-MS/MS empregando coluna Chirobiotic® V. O método foi linear no intervalo de 0,05 a 100; 0,05 a 10 e 0,02 a 10 ng/mL para os enantiômeros do carvedilol, hidroxifenilcarvedilol e O-desmetilcarvedilol, os desvios do estudo de precisão e exatidão foram inferiores a 15% e não foi observado efeito matriz. A farmacocinética avaliada por modelo não compartimental mostra acúmulo plasmático dos enantiômeros (R)-(+)-carvedilol, (R)-(+)-O-desmetilcarvedilol e (R)-(+)- hidroxifenilcarvedilol. A disposição cinética e o metabolismo dos enantiômeros do carvedilol não diferem entre os grupos de voluntários não comedicados e comedicados com dose única oral de glibenclamida e metformina. No entanto, os valores de AUC de ambos os enantiômeros do metabólito O-desmetilcarvedilol [(R)- (+): 6,92 vs 10,40 vs 11,91 ng.h/mL e (S)-(-): 2,36 vs 4,26 vs 3,98 ng/h/mL] são menores no grupo de pacientes portadores de diabetes mellitus tipo 2 quando comparados ao grupo de voluntários sadios não comedicados ou comedicados. Em compensação, os valores de AUC de ambos os enantiômeros do metabólito hidroxifenilcarvedilol [(R)-(+): 13,89 vs 6,60 vs 4,88 ng.h/mL e (S)-(-): 7,21 vs 1,50 vs 1,45 ng/h/mL] são maiores no grupo de pacientes portadores de diabetes mellitus tipo 2. Os parâmetros farmacocinéticos de um paciente metabolizador lento do CYP2D6, portador de diabetes mellitus tipo 2 e em tratamento com glibenclamida e metformina, permite inferir redução na formação de ambos os enantiômeros do metabólito hidroxifenilcarvedilol compensada pelo aumento na formação de ambos os enantiômeros do metabólito O-desmetilcarvedilol. Logo, a disposição cinética de ambos os enantiômeros do carvedilol sob a forma inalterada não difere entre metabolizadores rápidos e lentos do CYP2D6. O modelo não linear de efeitos mistos para a análise da disposição cinética e metabolismo populacional dos enantiômeros do carvedilol foi desenvolvido no NONMEM v.7.2 é preciso e possui capacidade preditiva adequada avaliada por métodos visuais do ajuste do modelo aos dados e ii bootstrap. Os valores de biodisponibilidade estimados pelo modelo para os enantiômeros (S)-(-) e (R)-(+)-carvedilol, respectivamente 16,43 e 25,4%, não diferem entre voluntários sadios e pacientes portadores de diabetes mellitus tipo 2 em tratamento com glibenclamida e metformina. Os valores de clearance pelo CYP2D6 estimados para o (S)-(-)-carvedilol foram de 1,65 vs 7,28 L/h, respectivamente, para os voluntários sadios e para os pacientes diabéticos, enquanto os estimados para o enantiômero (R)-(+)-carvedilol foram de 2,69 vs 13,7 L/h. Em relação ao clearance pelo CYP2C9, os valores estimados para o (S)-(-)-carvedilol foram de 16,2 vs 7,71 L/h, respectivamente, para os voluntários sadios e para os pacientes diabéticos, enquanto os estimados para o enantiômero (R)-(+)-carvedilol foram de 25,6 vs 10,5 L/h. Os valores de clearance por outras vias metabólicas são maiores para o (S)-(-)- carvedilol do que para o (R)-(+)-carvedilol (28,2 vs 4,86 L/h) e não diferem entre voluntários sadios e pacientes. Os valores de clearance total de ambos os enantiômeros do carvedilol não diferem entre os voluntários sadios e os pacientes portadores de diabetes mellitus tipo 2 [(S)-(-): 46,05 vs 43,19 L/h e (R)-(+): 33,15 vs 29,06 L/h], considerando que os menores clearances do CYP2C9 são compensados por maiores clearances do CYP2D6. A variação da frequência cardíaca induzida pelo exercício isométrico com o handgrip após a administração de dose única oral de 25 mg de carvedilol racêmico não mostra relação com as concentrações plasmáticas do (S)-(-)-carvedilol. / Carvedilol is an antihypertensive available as racemic mixture, the (S)-(-)- carvedilol is a ??and ?1 adrenergic blocker and (R)-(+)-carvedilol is only na ?1- adrenergic blocker. Carvedilol is metabolized primarily by glucuronidation and by CYP2D6 to hidroxifenilcarvedilol and CYP2C9 to O-desmetilcarvedilol. This study evaluates the disposition and metabolism of carvedilol, hidroxyphenilcarvedilol and Odesmethylcarvedilol enantiomers in health (n=13) and type II diabetes subjects treated with glibenclamide (5 mg/8h) and in a good glycemic control (n=13) and in a CYP2D6 poor metabolizer diabetes subject (n=1). The subjects received a single racemic carvedilol dose of 25 mg. blood samples wore collected until 24h. The heart rate was evaluated durig isometric handgrip exercise. Carvedilol and metabolites enantiomers wore evaluated in plasma sampels by LC-MS/MS. The pharmacokinetics was evaluate by noncompartimental model and higher levels of (R)-(+)-carvedilol, (R)-(+)-Odesmethylcarvedilol e (R)-(+)-hidroxiphenilcarvedilol levels are noticed. The carvedilol pharmacokinetics does not change between healthy and type II diabetes subjects. However the AUC values of both O-desmethylcarvedilol enantiomers are lower [(R)-(+): 6,92 vs 10,40 vs 11,91 ng.h/mL e (S)-(-): 2,36 vs 4,26 vs 3,98 ng/h/mL]in the diabetes subjects and the AUC values of both hidroxyphenilcarvedilol enantiomers are higher [(R)-(+): 13,89 vs 6,60 vs 4,88 ng.h/mL e (S)-(-): 7,21 vs 1,50 vs 1,45 ng/h/mL]. It is noticed in CYP2D6 poor metabolizer diabetes subject lower levels of hidroxyphenilcarvedilol but higher of O-desmetilcarvedilol and carvedilol disposition is not changed. A Non-linear mixed effects modelling was performed in NONMEM v.7.2 the model was validated by visual methods and bootstrap. The bioavailability of (S)-(-) and (R)-(+)-carvedilol was 16,43 e 25,4% and no covariate effect was noticed. The CYP2D6 clearance values were 1,65 vs 7,28 L/h to healthy and diabetes subjects, inasmuch (R)-(+)-carvedilol ones were 25,6 vs 10,5 L/h. The CYP2C9 clearance of (S)-(-)-carvedilol were 16,2 vs 7,71 L/h for healthy and diabetes subjects, while (R)- (+)-carvedilol ones were 25,6 vs 10,5 L/h. The (S)-(-)-carvedilol clearance by other metabolic routes are higher (28,2 vs 4,86 L/h) and does not change between healthy and diabetes subjects. Carvedilol total clearance also does not differ between healthy and diabetes subjects the because the lower CYP2C9 clearance are balanced by the higher CYP2D6 clearance. The cardiac frequency change induced by handgrip isometric exercise is not related with the (S)-(-)-carvedilol plasma levels.

Introduction : Le syndrome de l’apnée obstructive du sommeil (SAOS) est un trouble très prévalent chez les patients atteints du diabète de type 2 (DT2) et la littérature préconise un lien étroit entre le SAOS et la dysfonction glycémique. Cependant, les essais randomisés actuels évaluant le traitement du SAOS et les effets métaboliques chez les patients diabétiques sont limités au traitement par pression positive continue (PPC) – parcontre, une limitation majeure de ces études est une faible compliance. L’orthèse d’avancée mandibulaire (OAM) est une option de traitement alternative pour le SAOS qui est généralement mieux tolérée et acceptée par les patients que la PPC. Objectifs : L’objectif principal de cette étude est d’évaluer si un traitement de 3 mois avec une OAM améliore le contrôle glycémique chez les patients atteints du SAOS et le DT2 comparé à celui avec un appareil placébo. Les objectifs secondaires sont : 1) d’évaluer la faisabilité d’une OAM comme traitement du SAOS chez une population diabétique, 2) comparer les effets secondaires subjectifs ressentis lors du port de l’OAM ou de l’appareil placébo, 3) comparer les changements subjectifs dans la qualité de vie et sommeil avec les deux appareils, 4) comparer la compliance subjective et objective dans les deux groupes. Méthodes : 17 patients ont participé à cette étude pilote contrôlée et randomisée comparant le traitement du SAOS à l'aide d’une OAM (Somnodent®, n=7) et d'un appareil placébo (appareil Essix® mandibulaire, n=10). Des échantillons de sang mesurant le contrôle glycémique par les taux d'hémoglobine glyquée ont été prélevés avant et après le traitement. Trois polysomnographies ont été réalisées (au départ, après une période de titration de 2 mois et après une période de traitement de 3 mois). Tous les patients ont répondu à un questionnaire sur les effets indésirables après la période de titration. Les questionnaires suivants ont été comparés avant (V1), pendant (V4) et après (V6) le traitement : échelle de somnolence d’Epworth (ESS), questionnaire sur les résultats fonctionnels du sommeil (FOSQ), indice de qualité du sommeil de Pittsburg (PSQI), et l'échelle hospitalière d'anxiété et de dépression (HADS). Les patients ont rapporté leur compliance subjective dans un journal quotidien, et la compliance objective a été mesurée par une micropuce. Résultats : Aucune différence significative n'a été observée pour l’hémoglobine glycquée après 3-mois de traitement entre les deux groupes (p =0.75). L’OAM a présenté une diminution significative du SAOS mesurée par l'indice d'apnée-hypopnée (p =0.02) et l'indice de désaturation en oxygène (p =0.02). Aucune différence significative n'a été constatée lors de la comparaison des questionnaires sur les effets secondaires entre les groupes, plus précisément pour l'inconfort au niveau des mâchoires (p =0.15) et des changements occlusaux (p =0.41). La fréquence des complications était faible dans les deux groupes et n'a montré aucune différence significative (p =1.00). La satisfaction globale des patients était élevée dans les deux groupes et ne montrait aucune différence significative (p =1.00). Les deux groupes ont présenté des améliorations significatives des scores FOSQ (p =0.004 entre V1-4 et p =0.026 entre V1-6), des diminutions significatives pour ESS (p =0.023 entre V1-4), des diminutions significatives des scores d'anxiété (p =0.003 entre V1-4 et p =0.041 entre V1-6), ainsi qu’une diminution significative des scores de dépression (p =0.025 entre V1-6). Les patients du groupe avec OAM ont sur-rapporté de façon significative leur compliance subjective par rapport à la compliance objective mesurée par les micropuces (p =0.02). Conclusion : L’OAM est un traitement faisable pour le traitement du SAOS chez les patients atteints du DT2 et a démontré des effets secondaires minimes et un taux de satisfaction élevé. Un « effet placébo » important a été observé avec l’appareil placébo, ce qui souligne l’importance des études randomisées et contrôlées dans le domaine du traitement du SAOS. Les micropuces utilisées pour mesurer la compliance objective offrent des données plus fiables que les rapports subjectifs des patients. D'autres essais randomisés et contrôlés à grande échelle sont nécessaires, et des analyses futures d’un système de mesure de glucose en continue pourrait être plus précis pour évaluer les effets de l’OAM sur le contrôle glycémique ; l’investigation de phénotypes métaboliques chez certains patients qui pourraient mieux répondre au traitement de leur SAOS serait aussi important. / Introduction: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a disorder that is highly prevalent among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and the literature supports a strong link between OSA and glucose dysregulation. However, current randomized trials assessing the effect of OSA treatment on metabolic outcomes have been limited to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy, and one of the main limitations of these studies is poor compliance. A mandibular advancement device (MAD) is an alternative treatment option for OSA that is generally better tolerated and accepted by patients than CPAP. Objectives: The main objective of this study is to evaluate if 3 months of treatment with a MAD will improve glycemic control in patients with OSA and T2DM as compared to a Placebo Device. Secondary objectives will be: 1) to evaluate the feasibility of a MAD to treat sleep apnea in a diabetic population, 2) to compare subjective side effects of the MAD and Placebo Device, 3) to compare subjective changes in quality of life and sleep with both devices, and 4) to compare subjective and objective compliance in both groups. Methods: 17 patients participated in this randomized controlled pilot study, comparing treatment of OSA using a MAD (Somnodent, n=7) and a placebo device (mandibular Essix, n=10). Blood samples measuring glycemic control by glycated hemoglobin levels were collected before and after treatment. Three polysomnographies were performed (at baseline, after a 2-month titration period and after a 3-month treatment period). All patients answered a side-effects questionnaire after the titration period, and the following questionnaires were compared before (V1), during (V4) and after treatment (V6): Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ), the Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. Patients recorded subjective compliance in a daily journal, and objective compliance was measured by a microchip. Results: No significant difference was found in glycated hemoglobin levels between groups (p=0.75). The MAD group showed a significant decrease in OSA as measured by the Apnea-Hypopnea Index (p=0.02) and the Oxygen Desaturation Index (p=0.02). No significant difference was found when comparing Side Effects Questionnaires between groups, more specifically for discomfort in jaws (p=0.15) and changes in occlusion (p=0.41). Frequency of complications were low in both groups and showed no significant differences (p=1.00). Overall patient satisfaction was high in both groups and showed no significant differences (p=1.00). Both groups showed significant improvements in FOSQ scores (p=0.004 between V1-4, and p=0.026 between V1-6), significant decreases in ESS (p= 0.023 between V1-4), significant decreases in Anxiety scores (p=0.003 between V1-4, and p=0.041 between V1-6), as well as a significant decrease in Depression scores (p=0.025 between V1-6). Patients in the MAD group significantly over-reported their subjective compliance as compared to the objective compliance measured by a microchip (p=0.02). Conclusion: MAD is a feasible treatment for OSA in patients with T2DM as it was able to significantly improve OSA while demonstrating high overall satisfaction and minimal complications. A strong “placebo effect” was noted with the Placebo Device and reinforces the importance of randomized and controlled studies in the field of OSA treatment. Microchips to measure objective compliance should be used as they offer more reliable data than subjective records. Further large-scale randomized and controlled trials are required, as well as future analyses of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems which may allow for more precise evaluation of glycemic outcomes; investigating possible metabolic phenotypes in patients which may respond better to OSA treatment will be important.