Background: In recent years, technological advances in the field of diabetes have revolutionized the management, prognosis, and quality of life of diabetes patients and their environment. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of implementing the MiniMed 780G closed‐loop system in a pediatric and adolescent population previously treated with a continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion pump and intermittent glucose monitoring.Methods: Data were collected from 28 patients with type 1 diabetes aged 6 to 17 years, with a follow‐up of 6 months. We included both glucometric and quality of life variables, as well as quality of life in primary caregivers. Metabolic control variables were assessed at baseline (before system change) and at different cutoff points after initiation of the closed‐loop system (48 hours, 7 days, 14 days, 21 days, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months).Results: Time in range 70–180 mg/dL increased from 59.44% at baseline to 74.29% in the first 48 hours after automation of the new system, and this improvement was maintained at the other cutoff points, as was time in hyperglycemia 180–250 mg/dL (24.44% at baseline to 18.96% at 48 hours) and >250 mg/dL (11.71% at baseline to 3.82% at 48 hours).Conclusions: Our study showed an improvement in time in range and in all time spent in hyperglycemia from the first 48 hours after the automation of the system, which was maintained at 6 months.

Background: Good metabolic control of Type 1 diabetes (T1D) leads to a reduction in complications. The only validated parameter for establishing the degree of control is glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). We examined the relationship between HbA1c and a continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system. Materials and methods: A cohort prospective study with 191 pediatric patients with T1D was conducted. Time in range (TIR), time below range (TBR), coefficient of variation (CV), number of capillary blood glucose tests, and HbA1c before sensor insertion and at one year of use were collected. Results: Patients were classified into five groups according to HbA1c at one year of using CGM. They performed fewer capillary blood glucose test at one year using CGM (−6 +/− 2, p < 0.0001). We found statistically significant differences in TIR between categories. Although groups with HbA1c < 6.5% and HbA1c 6.5–7% had the highest TIR (62.214 and 50.462%), their values were highly below optimal control according to CGM consensus. Groups with TBR < 5% were those with HbA1c between 6.5% and 8%. Conclusions: In our study, groups classified as well-controlled by guidelines were not consistent with good control according to the CGM consensus criteria. HbA1c should not be considered as the only parameter for metabolic control. CGM parameters allow individualized targets.

Aims: To evaluate the relationship between daily sensor scan rates and changes in HbA1c and hypoglycemia in children. Methods: We enrolled 145 paediatric T1D patients into a prospective, interventional study of the impact of the FreeStyle Libre 1 system on measures of glycemic control. Results: HbA1c was higher at lower scan rates, and decreased as the scan rate increased to 15–20 scans, after which it rose at higher scan rates. An analysis of the change in hypoglycemia, based on the number of daily sensor scans, showed there was a significant correlation between daily scan rates and hypoglycemia. Subjects with higher daily scan rates reduced all levels of hypoglycaemia. Conclusions: HbA1c is higher at lower scan rates, and decreases as scan rate increases. Reductions in hypoglycemia were evident in subjects with higher daily scan rates.

Background: The integration of continuous glucose monitoring systems with insulin infusion pumps has shown improved glycemic control, with improvements in hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, Hb1Ac, and greater autonomy in daily life. These have been most studied in adults and there are currently not many articles published in the pediatric population that establish their correlation with age of debut. Methods: Prospective, single-study. A total of 28 patients (mean age 12 ± 2.43 years, 57% male, duration of diabetes 7.84 ± 2.46 years) were included and divided into two groups according to age at T1D onset (≤4 years and >4 years). Follow-up for 3 months, with glucometric variables extracted at different cut-off points after the start of the closed-loop (baseline, 1 month, 3 months). Results: Significant improvement was evidenced at 1 month and 3 months after closed-loop system implantation, with better glycemic control in the older age group at baseline at TIR (74.06% ± 6.37% vs. 80.33% ± 7.49% at 1 month, p < 0.003; 71.87% ± 6.58% vs. 78.75% ± 5.94% at 3 months, p < 0.009), TAR1 (18.25% ± 4.54% vs. 14.33% ± 5.74% at 1 month, p < 0.006; 19.87% ± 5.15% vs. 14.67% ± 4. 36% at 3 months, p < 0.009) and TAR2 (4.75% ± 2.67% vs. 2.75% ± 1.96% at 1 month, p = 0.0307; 5.40% ± 2.85% vs. 3% ± 2.45% at 3 months, p < 0.027). Conclusions: the use of automated systems such as the MiniMed^TM780G system brings glucometric results closer to those recommended by consensus, especially in age at T1D onset >4 years. However, the management in pediatrics continues to be a challenge even after the implementation of these systems, especially in terms of hyperglycemia and glycemic variability.