BACKGROUND: Our objective was to evaluate the accuracy and safety of a real-time (RT) continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) in patients before and after cardiothoracic surgery and to investigate whether activation of the alarm function of the RT-CGMS had an effect on glucose control. METHODS:Patients scheduled for elective cardiothoracic procedures, without a history of insulin-requiring diabetes, were perioperatively monitored with RT-CGMS for 72 h and were randomized into two groups: with or without the alarm function (set at 4 and 10 mmol/L) of the device activated. Sensor values were compared with capillary, arterial, and venous blood glucose values. Percentages of time spent in various glucose ranges were compared between groups. RESULTS: There were no adverse effects of the RT-CGMS. Of the 1,001 sensor value comparisons with capillary or arterial measurements, 96.6% fell within Clarke Error Grid zones A and B, with relative absolute differences ranging from 15% (preoperative period) to 12% (intensive care unit period) to 14% (postoperative period on the ward). Seventeen (7.9%) arterial and 16 (2.0%) capillary comparisons fell within zone D or E. Whether or not the alarm function, as used in this pilot study, was activated did not affect time spent in different glucose ranges. CONCLUSIONS: Although the RT-CGMS is safe and accurate according to accepted standards, there are still small aberrations, which in our opinion preclude unlimited use in its present form in a clinical setting. The effect of the alarm function at different glucose levels remains to be investigated.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Our objective was to evaluate the accuracy and safety of a real-time (RT) continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) in patients before and after cardiothoracic surgery and to investigate whether activation of the alarm function of the RT-CGMS had an effect on glucose control. METHODS:Patients scheduled for elective cardiothoracic procedures, without a history of insulin-requiring diabetes, were perioperatively monitored with RT-CGMS for 72 h and were randomized into two groups: with or without the alarm function (set at 4 and 10 mmol/L) of the device activated. Sensor values were compared with capillary, arterial, and venous blood glucose values. Percentages of time spent in various glucose ranges were compared between groups. RESULTS: There were no adverse effects of the RT-CGMS. Of the 1,001 sensor value comparisons with capillary or arterial measurements, 96.6% fell within Clarke Error Grid zones A and B, with relative absolute differences ranging from 15% (preoperative period) to 12% (intensive care unit period) to 14% (postoperative period on the ward). Seventeen (7.9%) arterial and 16 (2.0%) capillary comparisons fell within zone D or E. Whether or not the alarm function, as used in this pilot study, was activated did not affect time spent in different glucose ranges. CONCLUSIONS: Although the RT-CGMS is safe and accurate according to accepted standards, there are still small aberrations, which in our opinion preclude unlimited use in its present form in a clinical setting. The effect of the alarm function at different glucose levels remains to be investigated.
Authors: Georgia M Davis; Rodolfo J Galindo; Alexandra L Migdal; Guillermo E Umpierrez Journal: Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am Date: 2020-03 Impact factor: 4.741
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