I do sadly have pancreatic atrophy. I will pursue as it’s not going well for me I think
I can't help wondering if your pancreatic atrophy means that your diabetes diagnosis should be Type 3c, rather than Type 2.
Ended in a&e it was while there a consultant after some test mentioned my pancreas but tailed off, it was get in and out.
I've just looked back to your initial post and reminded myself that someone else thought that. Can you get into your medical notes to find out who said this or when. I note you have been formally diagnosed T2 for some years. Just how many years and were pancreatic issues mentioned originally?
Some information about T3c is below:
You may have heard of the more common types of diabetes like type 1, type 2 and gestational. But there are actually many other types of diabetes that aren't as well known. Type 3c diabetes develops because of the damage to the pancreas, which can happen for a few different reasons. And although...
www.diabetes.org.uk
The point is that if you do have pancreatic damage, then your treatment could follow a different path as a T3c, starting with referral to an Endocrinologist, who can investigate from a different perspective. Depending on the findings prescribing CGM becomes an option, to allow you to monitor your BG more easily.
I am at one end of T3c as someone with absolutely no pancreas. But many more folk get here after pancreatitis causing permanent, irreparable, damage to their pancreas. Their diabetes is definitely not T1 (ie not an autoimmune condition) and while possibly closer to T2 (ie principally because of too much insulin resistance, preventing someone's body from making best use of any insulin they do produce) their diabetes is also caused by poor insulin production because of the pancreatic damage. Overall T3c is not commonly recognised nor diagnosed and those who do get this diagnosis are a very small proportion of the whole diabetic community.
I’ve just looked at my medical records and it states abnormal against my HbAc1 readings. 46 /52/ 48. I am starting to get worried as ten years ago after an ablation for LVT I was told by diabetic nurse in cardiology never below 5 never above 10. Yet the GP practice nurse has my ranges between 4.7 and 6.5 which contradicts everything cardiology told me. Anyone has any information that would help please.
This apparent contradiction is, in my non-medical opinion, because the general good practice advice means between 5 to 10 mmol/L applies; hence the cardiology observation. People without diabetes might get such fluctuations, but their metabolic responses manage their BG behind the scenes using pancreatic hormones such as insulin, glucagon and somostatin to sustain normality. Most of such people will be oblivious to such variations. Your cardiologist nurse included a reference to this knowing that you had a T2 diagnosis. A GP practice nurse, when dealing with routine T2 patients is providing a different set of guidelines: BG finger prick tests for ideal levels BEFORE eating any meal, from 5-7, PLUS then retesting 2 hrs after eating looking for a recovery to below 8 and preferably recovery to something less. Those sort of levels will give attainable targets for T2s, meal by meal and day by day to bring their BG levels steadily down and into a sustainable, medically safe state.
But with an atrophied pancreas normal pancreatic functions can be compromised and the routine T2 methodology may not be relevant. At the very least you are not a "standard" T2, ie with high, natural, insulin resistance causing you to have elevated BG.
Anyway, do pursue this line of thought. Many GP Practices are not aware of this subtle, but important distinction. At the very least you are at risk of being or becoming T3c. Good luck
