BACKGROUND: Standard care for infants on extracorporeal life support (ECLS) relies on intermittent measurement of blood glucose (BG); however, this can lead to significant changes in BG that go unrecognized for several hours. The present study was designed to assess performance and clinical applicability of a subcutaneous glucose sensor technology modified for use as a blood-contacting sensor within the ECLS circuit. METHODS: Twelve children, aged 3 years or less, requiring ECLS support were studied. Three continuous glucose sensors (Medtronic MiniMed) were inserted into hubs placed in line with the ECLS circuit. Blood glucose was assessed with a laboratory analyzer (BG(LAB); Bayer Rapidlab 860) approximately every 5 h (mean 4.9 ± 3.3 h) with more frequent samples obtained with a bedside monitor (HemoCue) as needed. Sensor current (I(SIG)) was transmitted to a laptop computer and retrospectively calibrated using BGLAB. Sensor performance was assessed by mean absolute relative difference (MARD), linear regression slope and intercept, and correlation, all with BGLAB as reference. RESULTS: The BGLAB averaged 107.6 ± 36.4 mg/dl (mean ± standard deviation) ranging from 58 to 366 mg/dl. The MARD was 11.4%, with linear regression slope (0.86 ± 0.030) and intercept (9.0 ± 3.2 mg/dl) different from 1 and 0, respectively (p < .05), and correlation (r² = 0.76; p < .001). The system was not associated with any adverse events, and placement and removal into the hubs was easily accomplished. Instances in which more frequent BG values were obtained using a bedside HemoCue (BGHEMO) monitor showed the sensor to respond rapidly to changes. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that continuous sensors can be adapted for use in an ECLS circuit with accuracy similar to or better than that achieved with the subcutaneous site. Continuous glucose monitoring in this population can rapidly detect changes in BG that would not otherwise be observed. Further studies will be needed to assess the benefit of continuous glucose monitoring in this population.
BACKGROUND: Standard care for infants on extracorporeal life support (ECLS) relies on intermittent measurement of blood glucose (BG); however, this can lead to significant changes in BG that go unrecognized for several hours. The present study was designed to assess performance and clinical applicability of a subcutaneous glucose sensor technology modified for use as a blood-contacting sensor within the ECLS circuit. METHODS: Twelve children, aged 3 years or less, requiring ECLS support were studied. Three continuous glucose sensors (Medtronic MiniMed) were inserted into hubs placed in line with the ECLS circuit. Blood glucose was assessed with a laboratory analyzer (BG(LAB); Bayer Rapidlab 860) approximately every 5 h (mean 4.9 ± 3.3 h) with more frequent samples obtained with a bedside monitor (HemoCue) as needed. Sensor current (I(SIG)) was transmitted to a laptop computer and retrospectively calibrated using BGLAB. Sensor performance was assessed by mean absolute relative difference (MARD), linear regression slope and intercept, and correlation, all with BGLAB as reference. RESULTS: The BGLAB averaged 107.6 ± 36.4 mg/dl (mean ± standard deviation) ranging from 58 to 366 mg/dl. The MARD was 11.4%, with linear regression slope (0.86 ± 0.030) and intercept (9.0 ± 3.2 mg/dl) different from 1 and 0, respectively (p < .05), and correlation (r² = 0.76; p < .001). The system was not associated with any adverse events, and placement and removal into the hubs was easily accomplished. Instances in which more frequent BG values were obtained using a bedside HemoCue (BGHEMO) monitor showed the sensor to respond rapidly to changes. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that continuous sensors can be adapted for use in an ECLS circuit with accuracy similar to or better than that achieved with the subcutaneous site. Continuous glucose monitoring in this population can rapidly detect changes in BG that would not otherwise be observed. Further studies will be needed to assess the benefit of continuous glucose monitoring in this population.
Authors: Patrick J Javid; David R Halwick; Peter Betit; John E Thompson; Kenny Long; Yanan Zhang; Tom Jaksic; Michael S D Agus Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: Charles E Smith; Nicholas R Styn; Satish Kalhan; Alfred C Pinchak; Inderjit S Gill; Richard P Kramer; Tejbir Sidhu Journal: J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 2.628
Authors: Ursula G Kyle; Philippe Jolliet; Laurence Genton; Christoph A Meier; Nouri Mensi; Jean-Daniel Graf; Jean-Claude Chevrolet; Claude Pichard Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2005-10-25 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: P Glass; A E Wagner; P H Papero; S R Rajasingham; L A Civitello; M S Kjaer; C E Coffman; P R Getson; B L Short Journal: J Pediatr Date: 1995-09 Impact factor: 4.406
Authors: Frank M Brunkhorst; Christoph Engel; Frank Bloos; Andreas Meier-Hellmann; Max Ragaller; Norbert Weiler; Onnen Moerer; Matthias Gruendling; Michael Oppert; Stefan Grond; Derk Olthoff; Ulrich Jaschinski; Stefan John; Rolf Rossaint; Tobias Welte; Martin Schaefer; Peter Kern; Evelyn Kuhnt; Michael Kiehntopf; Christiane Hartog; Charles Natanson; Markus Loeffler; Konrad Reinhart Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-01-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ayman A Al Hayek; Asirvatham A Robert; Saleha Babli; Khuloud Almonea; Mohamed A Al Dawish Journal: Diabetes Ther Date: 2016-12-19 Impact factor: 2.945