Literature DB >> 18798719

Evaluation of a continuous glucose monitor in an unselected general intensive care population.

Grant C Price1, Karen Stevenson, Timothy S Walsh.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of the Guardian REALTime continuous glucose monitoring system (Medtronic MiniMed, Northridge, Calif, USA) in critically ill adults compared with standard bedside point-of-care testing of capillary and arterial blood glucose levels.
SETTING: An 18-bed mixed university tertiary referral intensive care unit, July to December 2006. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Glucose measurements by the Guardian subcutaneous monitoring system were compared with simultaneous measurements of capillary and arterial blood glucose levels. Correlation between the different methods was determined by linear regression, using capillary blood glucose values as the "gold standard", and was further analysed by Bland and Altman plots.
RESULTS: 17 emergency-admission mechanically ventilated adults were studied. A total of 1101 glucose measurements were available for analysis (from Guardian, 371; capillary blood samples, 373; and arterial blood samples, 357). With an a-priori acceptable difference of +/-1mmol/L, the Guardian system did not perform well enough to replace current methods of glucose measurement. There was also significant discrepancy between arterial and capillary blood glucose measurements. These common methods of intermittent blood glucose sampling are therefore not interchangeable.
CONCLUSION: The Guardian REAL-Time continuous glucose monitoring system cannot replace current methods of blood glucose measurement at a glucose threshold of +/-1mmol/L. It may have role as an early warning detection system for hypo- or hyperglycaemia, but this needs to be evaluated in a prospective study of extremes of blood glucose levels in a critically ill population. Glucose measurements in arterial and capillary blood samples with a point-of-care glucometer also showed wide discrepancies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18798719

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Resusc        ISSN: 1441-2772            Impact factor:   2.159


  13 in total

Review 1.  Stress hyperglycaemia.

Authors:  Kathleen M Dungan; Susan S Braithwaite; Jean-Charles Preiser
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2009-05-23       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  What is a NICE-SUGAR for patients in the intensive care unit?

Authors:  Rinaldo Bellomo; Moritoki Egi
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 7.616

Review 3.  Vascular Glucose Sensor Symposium: Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems (CGMS) for Hospitalized and Ambulatory Patients at Risk for Hyperglycemia, Hypoglycemia, and Glycemic Variability.

Authors:  Jeffrey I Joseph; Marc C Torjman; Paul J Strasma
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2015-06-15

Review 4.  Comparative analysis of the efficacy of continuous glucose monitoring and self-monitoring of blood glucose in type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Baraka Floyd; Prakash Chandra; Stephanie Hall; Christopher Phillips; Ernest Alema-Mensah; Gregory Strayhorn; Elizabeth O Ofili; Guillermo E Umpierrez
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2012-09-01

5.  Continuous Glucose Monitors and Automated Insulin Dosing Systems in the Hospital Consensus Guideline.

Authors:  Rodolfo J Galindo; Guillermo E Umpierrez; Robert J Rushakoff; Ananda Basu; Suzanne Lohnes; James H Nichols; Elias K Spanakis; Juan Espinoza; Nadine E Palermo; Dessa Garnett Awadjie; Leigh Bak; Bruce Buckingham; Curtiss B Cook; Guido Freckmann; Lutz Heinemann; Roman Hovorka; Nestoras Mathioudakis; Tonya Newman; David N O'Neal; Michaela Rickert; David B Sacks; Jane Jeffrie Seley; Amisha Wallia; Trisha Shang; Jennifer Y Zhang; Julia Han; David C Klonoff
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2020-09-28

Review 6.  Social, organizational, and contextual characteristics of clinical decision support systems for intensive insulin therapy: a literature review and case study.

Authors:  Thomas R Campion; Lemuel R Waitman; Addison K May; Asli Ozdas; Nancy M Lorenzi; Cynthia S Gadd
Journal:  Int J Med Inform       Date:  2009-10-07       Impact factor: 4.046

7.  The use of continuous glucose monitoring combined with computer-based eMPC algorithm for tight glucose control in cardiosurgical ICU.

Authors:  Petr Kopecký; Miloš Mráz; Jan Bláha; Jaroslav Lindner; Stĕpán Svačina; Roman Hovorka; Martin Haluzík
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-02-20       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  Accuracy and reliability of continuous glucose monitoring in the intensive care unit: a head-to-head comparison of two subcutaneous glucose sensors in cardiac surgery patients.

Authors:  Sarah E Siegelaar; Temo Barwari; Jeroen Hermanides; Wim Stooker; Peter H J van der Voort; J Hans DeVries
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2011-03       Impact factor: 19.112

9.  Continuous glucose monitors prove highly accurate in critically ill children.

Authors:  Brian C Bridges; Catherine M Preissig; Kevin O Maher; Mark R Rigby
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 9.097

10.  Real-time continuous glucose monitoring shows high accuracy within 6 hours after sensor calibration: a prospective study.

Authors:  Xiao-Yan Yue; Yi Zheng; Ye-Hua Cai; Ning-Ning Yin; Jian-Xin Zhou
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-28       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.