Literature DB >> 22150642

The effect of rising vs. falling glucose level on amperometric glucose sensor lag and accuracy in Type 1 diabetes.

W K Ward1, J M Engle, D Branigan, J El Youssef, R G Massoud, J R Castle.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Because declining glucose levels should be detected quickly in persons with Type 1 diabetes, a lag between blood glucose and subcutaneous sensor glucose can be problematic. It is unclear whether the magnitude of sensor lag is lower during falling glucose than during rising glucose.
METHODS: Initially, we analysed 95 data segments during which glucose changed and during which very frequent reference blood glucose monitoring was performed. However, to minimize confounding effects of noise and calibration error, we excluded data segments in which there was substantial sensor error. After these exclusions, and combination of data from duplicate sensors, there were 72 analysable data segments (36 for rising glucose, 36 for falling). We measured lag in two ways: (1) the time delay at the vertical mid-point of the glucose change (regression delay); and (2) determination of the optimal time shift required to minimize the difference between glucose sensor signals and blood glucose values drawn concurrently.
RESULTS: Using the regression delay method, the mean sensor lag for rising vs. falling glucose segments was 8.9 min (95%CI 6.1-11.6) vs. 1.5 min (95%CI -2.6 to 5.5, P<0.005). Using the time shift optimization method, results were similar, with a lag that was higher for rising than for falling segments [8.3 (95%CI 5.8-10.7) vs. 1.5 min (95% CI -2.2 to 5.2), P<0.001]. Commensurate with the lag results, sensor accuracy was greater during falling than during rising glucose segments.
CONCLUSIONS: In Type 1 diabetes, when noise and calibration error are minimized to reduce effects that confound delay measurement, subcutaneous glucose sensors demonstrate a shorter lag duration and greater accuracy when glucose is falling than when rising.
© 2011 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine © 2011 Diabetes UK.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22150642      PMCID: PMC3697744          DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-5491.2011.03545.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabet Med        ISSN: 0742-3071            Impact factor:   4.359


  21 in total

1.  Graphical and numerical evaluation of continuous glucose sensing time lag.

Authors:  Boris P Kovatchev; Devin Shields; Marc Breton
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 6.118

2.  Analysis of time lags and other sources of error of the DexCom SEVEN continuous glucose monitor.

Authors:  Apurv Kamath; Aarthi Mahalingam; James Brauker
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 6.118

Review 3.  Does fall in tissue glucose precede fall in blood glucose?

Authors:  F Sternberg; C Meyerhoff; F J Mennel; H Mayer; F Bischof; E F Pfeiffer
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 10.122

4.  Use of a subcutaneous glucose sensor to detect decreases in glucose concentration prior to observation in blood.

Authors:  V Thomé-Duret; G Reach; M N Gangnerau; F Lemonnier; J C Klein; Y Zhang; Y Hu; G S Wilson
Journal:  Anal Chem       Date:  1996-11-01       Impact factor: 6.986

5.  Diurnal rhythm of insulin sensitivity in subjects with normal and impaired glucose tolerance.

Authors:  B Schulz; K P Ratzmann; G Albrecht; H Bibergeil
Journal:  Exp Clin Endocrinol       Date:  1983-05

6.  Low-glycemic index foods improve long-term glycemic control in NIDDM.

Authors:  J C Brand; S Colagiuri; S Crossman; A Allen; D C Roberts; A S Truswell
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 19.112

7.  Measurement and modeling of the transient difference between blood and subcutaneous glucose concentrations in the rat after injection of insulin.

Authors:  D W Schmidtke; A C Freeland; A Heller; R T Bonnecaze
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1998-01-06       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Glycemic index of foods: a physiological basis for carbohydrate exchange.

Authors:  D J Jenkins; T M Wolever; R H Taylor; H Barker; H Fielden; J M Baldwin; A C Bowling; H C Newman; A L Jenkins; D V Goff
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  1981-03       Impact factor: 7.045

9.  Analysis, modeling, and simulation of the accuracy of continuous glucose sensors.

Authors:  Marc Breton; Boris Kovatchev
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2008-09

10.  The second-meal phenomenon in type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Ana Jovanovic; Jean Gerrard; Roy Taylor
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2009-04-14       Impact factor: 17.152

View more
  9 in total

1.  Factors affecting the success of glucagon delivered during an automated closed-loop system in type 1 diabetes.

Authors:  P A Bakhtiani; J El Youssef; A K Duell; D L Branigan; P G Jacobs; M R Lasarev; J R Castle; W K Ward
Journal:  J Diabetes Complications       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 2.852

Review 2.  Can glucose be monitored accurately at the site of subcutaneous insulin delivery?

Authors:  W Kenneth Ward; Jessica R Castle; Peter G Jacobs; Robert S Cargill
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2014-02-18

3.  Interstitium versus Blood Equilibrium in Glucose Concentration and its Impact on Subcutaneous Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems.

Authors:  Cosimo Scuffi
Journal:  Eur Endocrinol       Date:  2014-02-28

Review 4.  Technology to Reduce Hypoglycemia.

Authors:  Ester Yeoh; Pratik Choudhary
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2015-04-16

5.  CGM-measured glucose values have a strong correlation with C-peptide, HbA1c and IDAAC, but do poorly in predicting C-peptide levels in the two years following onset of diabetes.

Authors:  Bruce Buckingham; Peiyao Cheng; Roy W Beck; Craig Kollman; Katrina J Ruedy; Stuart A Weinzimer; Robert Slover; Andrew A Bremer; John Fuqua; William Tamborlane
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2015-03-14       Impact factor: 10.122

6.  Feasibility of Factory Calibration for Subcutaneous Glucose Sensors in Subjects With Diabetes.

Authors:  Udo Hoss; Erwin S Budiman; Hanqing Liu; Mark P Christiansen
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2014-01-01

Review 7.  Nonadjunctive Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Diabetes Treatment Decisions.

Authors:  Jessica R Castle; Peter G Jacobs
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2016-08-22

8.  Time Delay of CGM Sensors: Relevance, Causes, and Countermeasures.

Authors:  Günther Schmelzeisen-Redeker; Michael Schoemaker; Harald Kirchsteiger; Guido Freckmann; Lutz Heinemann; Luigi Del Re
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2015-08-04

9.  Prevention of exercise-associated dysglycemia: a case study-based approach.

Authors:  Dessi P Zaharieva; Michael C Riddell
Journal:  Diabetes Spectr       Date:  2015-01
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.