Literature DB >> 28930495

A Multicenter Real-Life Study on the Effect of Flash Glucose Monitoring on Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes.

Ranjit Mohan Anjana1, Jothydev Kesavadev2, Deshpande Neeta3, Mangesh Tiwaskar4, Rajendra Pradeepa1,2, Saravanan Jebarani1, Suresh Thangamani1, Nadiminty Ganapathi Sastry1, Srivastava Brijendra Kumar1, Muthu Ramu1, Pokal Prasanna Kumar Gupta1, Jayaprakash Vignesh1, Sundramoorthy Chandru1, Sengottuvel Kayalvizhi1, Padoor Sethuraman Jagdish1, Subash Chandra Bose Uthra1, Munawar Lovelena1, Sah Jyoti1, Sengodan Suguna Priya1, Alagarsamy Kannan1, Viswanathan Mohan1, Ranjit Unnikrishnan1.   

Abstract

AIM: To assess the efficacy of ambulatory glucose profiling (AGP) generated by FreeStyle LibrePro™ flash glucose monitoring (FCGM) on glycemic control in patients with uncontrolled type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D).
METHODS: Clinical and biochemical data were obtained from 5072 patients with diabetes who had an A1c ≥7% (2536 who had been initiated on FCGM-based AGP between March 2015 and October 2016 [cases] and 2536 age-, gender-, A1c-, site- and time-matched controls who were not initiated on AGP) across seven diabetes clinics in India. Anthropometric and clinical measurements were obtained through standardized techniques. Fasting and postprandial plasma glucose and glycated hemoglobin(A1c) were estimated before and after initiation of AGP.
RESULTS: Overall, there was a significant decrease in A1c both in cases and controls; however, the magnitude of reduction was higher among cases (1% vs.0.7%; P < 0.001).The overall reduction in A1c among cases was higher in T2D (9.2% to 8.3%) compared with T1D (9.6% to 9.4%); however, the absolute difference in A1c reduction between cases and controls was higher among T1D (0.5% vs. 0.2%) patients. The reduction in glycemic parameters was irrespective of age or gender (P for trend <0.001) across all study sites. The greatest reductions in A1c were noted within 6 months of AGP initiation. Multiple logistic regression showed that those who did not use AGP had a 1.42 higher risk (95% CI: 1.24-1.64) of not achieving even 0.1% reduction in A1c compared with those who were initiated on AGP even after adjusting for age, gender, body-mass index, systolic blood pressure, time to follow-up A1c, and medication use.
CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that FCGM-based AGP with FreeStyle LibrePro is associated with significant reductions in A1c levels in both T1D and T2D. In addition, improvement in A1c levels was maintained across all age groups and in patients enrolled at different diabetes clinics in India.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ambulatory glucose profile; Continuous glucose monitoring; Diabetes; Glycated hemoglobin; Glycemic control; Indians.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28930495

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther        ISSN: 1520-9156            Impact factor:   6.118


  9 in total

1.  Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2018. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).

Authors:  Melanie J Davies; David A D'Alessio; Judith Fradkin; Walter N Kernan; Chantal Mathieu; Geltrude Mingrone; Peter Rossing; Apostolos Tsapas; Deborah J Wexler; John B Buse
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 10.122

Review 2.  Flash Glucose Monitoring: A Review of the Literature with a Special Focus on Type 1 Diabetes.

Authors:  Giulia Mancini; Maria Giulia Berioli; Elisa Santi; Francesco Rogari; Giada Toni; Giorgia Tascini; Roberta Crispoldi; Giulia Ceccarini; Susanna Esposito
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2018-07-29       Impact factor: 5.717

3.  Differences of FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring System and Finger Pricks on Clinical Characteristics and Glucose Monitoring Satisfactions in Type 1 Diabetes Using Insulin Pump.

Authors:  Ayman A Al Hayek; Asirvatham A Robert; Mohamed A Al Dawish
Journal:  Clin Med Insights Endocrinol Diabetes       Date:  2019-07-01

Review 4.  Continuous Glucose Monitoring: A Brief Review for Primary Care Practitioners.

Authors:  Ramzi Ajjan; David Slattery; Eugene Wright
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2019-01-18       Impact factor: 3.845

5.  Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2018. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).

Authors:  Melanie J Davies; David A D'Alessio; Judith Fradkin; Walter N Kernan; Chantal Mathieu; Geltrude Mingrone; Peter Rossing; Apostolos Tsapas; Deborah J Wexler; John B Buse
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2018-10-04       Impact factor: 19.112

Review 6.  Effectiveness and acceptability of continuous glucose monitoring for type 2 diabetes management: A narrative review.

Authors:  Pennie J Taylor; Campbell H Thompson; Grant D Brinkworth
Journal:  J Diabetes Investig       Date:  2018-03-01       Impact factor: 4.232

7.  Precision diabetes: Where do we stand today?

Authors:  Viswanathan Mohan; Ranjit Unnikrishnan
Journal:  Indian J Med Res       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.375

8.  Accuracy of flash glucose monitoring in insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Tatsuya Sato; Hiroto Oshima; Kei Nakata; Yukishige Kimura; Toshiyuki Yano; Masato Furuhashi; Masaya Tanno; Takayuki Miki; Tetsuji Miura
Journal:  J Diabetes Investig       Date:  2018-11-12       Impact factor: 4.232

9.  Comparison between a flash glucose monitoring system and a portable blood glucose meter for monitoring dogs with diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Francesca Del Baldo; Claudia Canton; Silvia Testa; Harry Swales; Ignazio Drudi; Stefania Golinelli; Federico Fracassi
Journal:  J Vet Intern Med       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 3.333

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.