OBJECTIVE: Data investigating the possible disturbing influence of insulin in the vicinity of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is lacking. We investigated the hypothesis that high local insulin concentrations would interfere with sensor readings. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Two microdialysis sensors were inserted in the periumbilical region of 10 continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII)-treated type 1 patients. A test sensor was inserted as close as possible to the insulin catheter and compared with a control sensor. Glucose peak and nadir were induced. Horizontal and vertical shifts were assessed using curve fitting, and mean absolute difference (MAD) between paired blood and sensor values were calculated. RESULTS: Curve fitting showed no significant differences between the two sensors. MAD +/- SD was 8.50 +/- 3.47% for the test sensor and 9.21 +/- 3.17% for the control sensor, P = 0.72. CONCLUSIONS: Microdialysis CGM can be accurately performed in the proximity of CSII systems.
OBJECTIVE: Data investigating the possible disturbing influence of insulin in the vicinity of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is lacking. We investigated the hypothesis that high local insulin concentrations would interfere with sensor readings. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Two microdialysis sensors were inserted in the periumbilical region of 10 continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII)-treated type 1 patients. A test sensor was inserted as close as possible to the insulin catheter and compared with a control sensor. Glucose peak and nadir were induced. Horizontal and vertical shifts were assessed using curve fitting, and mean absolute difference (MAD) between paired blood and sensor values were calculated. RESULTS: Curve fitting showed no significant differences between the two sensors. MAD +/- SD was 8.50 +/- 3.47% for the test sensor and 9.21 +/- 3.17% for the control sensor, P = 0.72. CONCLUSIONS: Microdialysis CGM can be accurately performed in the proximity of CSII systems.
Authors: Werner Regittnig; Stefan Lindpointner; Stefan Korsatko; Dina Tutkur; Manfred Bodenlenz; Thomas R Pieber Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2012-11-05 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: W Kenneth Ward; Gabriel Heinrich; Matthew Breen; Sheila Benware; Nicole Vollum; Kristin Morris; Chad Knutsen; Joseph D Kowalski; Scott Campbell; Jerry Biehler; Mark S Vreeke; Scott M Vanderwerf; Jessica R Castle; Robert S Cargill Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2017-02-21 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: Peter G Jacobs; Nichole S Tyler; Scott M Vanderwerf; Clara Mosquera-Lopez; Thomas Seidl; Robert Cargill; Deborah Branigan; Katrina Ramsey; Kristin Morris; Sheila Benware; W Kenneth Ward; Jessica R Castle Journal: Biosens Bioelectron Date: 2020-04-29 Impact factor: 12.545
Authors: Stefan Lindpointner; Stefan Korsatko; Gerd Köhler; Hans Köhler; Roland Schaller; Lukas Schaupp; Martin Ellmerer; Thomas R Pieber; Werner Regittnig Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2010-01-22 Impact factor: 17.152