Background: The Eversense® Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) System, with the first 90-day implantable sensor, received FDA (Food and Drug Administration) approval in June 2018. No real-world experience has been published. Methods: Deidentified sensor glucose (SG) data from August 1, 2018 to May 11, 2019 in the Eversense Data Management System (DMS) were analyzed for the first 205 patients who reached a 90-day wear period on the Eversense CGM system. The mean SG, standard deviation (SD), median interquartile range, coefficient of variation (CV), glucose measurement index (GMI), and percent and time in minutes across glucose ranges were computed for the 24-h time period, the nighttime (00:00-06:00), and by 30-day wear periods. Sensor accuracy, sensor reinsertion rate, transmitter wear time, and safety data were assessed. Results: Of the 205 patients, 129 identified as type 1, 18 as type 2, and 58 were unreported. Fifty were CGM naive, 112 had prior CGM experience, and 43 were unreported. The mean SG was 161.8 mg/dL, SD was 57.4 mg/dL, CV was 0.35, and GMI was 7.18%. Percent SG at <54 mg/dL was 1.2% (18 min), <70 mg/dL was 4.1% (59.7 min), time in range (≥70-180 mg/dL) was 62.3% (897.7 min), >180-250 mg/dL was 21.9% (315.8 min), and >250 mg/dL was 11.6% (166.7 min). Nighttime values were similar. The glucometric values were similar over 30-day time periods of the sensor wear. The mean absolute relative difference (SD) using 27,708 calibration paired points against home blood glucose meters was 11.2% (11.3%). The sensor reinsertion rate was 78.5%. The median transmitter wear time was 83.6%. There were no related serious adverse events. Conclusion: The Eversense real-world data showed promising glycemic results, sensor accuracy, and safety. These data suggest that the Eversense CGM system is a valuable tool for diabetes management.
Background: The Eversense® Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) System, with the first 90-day implantable sensor, received FDA (Food and Drug Administration) approval in June 2018. No real-world experience has been published. Methods: Deidentified sensor glucose (SG) data from August 1, 2018 to May 11, 2019 in the Eversense Data Management System (DMS) were analyzed for the first 205 patients who reached a 90-day wear period on the Eversense CGM system. The mean SG, standard deviation (SD), median interquartile range, coefficient of variation (CV), glucose measurement index (GMI), and percent and time in minutes across glucose ranges were computed for the 24-h time period, the nighttime (00:00-06:00), and by 30-day wear periods. Sensor accuracy, sensor reinsertion rate, transmitter wear time, and safety data were assessed. Results: Of the 205 patients, 129 identified as type 1, 18 as type 2, and 58 were unreported. Fifty were CGM naive, 112 had prior CGM experience, and 43 were unreported. The mean SG was 161.8 mg/dL, SD was 57.4 mg/dL, CV was 0.35, and GMI was 7.18%. Percent SG at <54 mg/dL was 1.2% (18 min), <70 mg/dL was 4.1% (59.7 min), time in range (≥70-180 mg/dL) was 62.3% (897.7 min), >180-250 mg/dL was 21.9% (315.8 min), and >250 mg/dL was 11.6% (166.7 min). Nighttime values were similar. The glucometric values were similar over 30-day time periods of the sensor wear. The mean absolute relative difference (SD) using 27,708 calibration paired points against home blood glucose meters was 11.2% (11.3%). The sensor reinsertion rate was 78.5%. The median transmitter wear time was 83.6%. There were no related serious adverse events. Conclusion: The Eversense real-world data showed promising glycemic results, sensor accuracy, and safety. These data suggest that the Eversense CGM system is a valuable tool for diabetes management.
Entities:
Keywords:
Continuous glucose monitoring; Glucometrics; Implantable sensor; Safety; Type 1 diabetes; Type 2 diabetes
Authors: Richard I G Holt; J Hans DeVries; Amy Hess-Fischl; Irl B Hirsch; M Sue Kirkman; Tomasz Klupa; Barbara Ludwig; Kirsten Nørgaard; Jeremy Pettus; Eric Renard; Jay S Skyler; Frank J Snoek; Ruth S Weinstock; Anne L Peters Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2021-12 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Concetta Irace; Antonio Cutruzzolà; Annamaria Nuzzi; Roberta Assaloni; Barbara Brunato; Dario Pitocco; Linda Tartaglione; Sergio Di Molfetta; Angelo Cignarelli; Luigi Laviola; Giuseppe Citro; Elisabetta Lovati; Agostino Gnasso; Katherine S Tweden; Francine R Kaufman Journal: Diabetes Obes Metab Date: 2020-02-27 Impact factor: 6.577
Authors: Satish K Garg; David Liljenquist; Bruce Bode; Mark P Christiansen; Timothy S Bailey; Ronald L Brazg; Douglas S Denham; Anna R Chang; Halis Kaan Akturk; Andrew Dehennis; Katherine S Tweden; Francine R Kaufman Journal: Diabetes Technol Ther Date: 2021-09-09 Impact factor: 6.118
Authors: Trisha Shang; Jennifer Y Zhang; B Wayne Bequette; Jennifer K Raymond; Gerard Coté; Jennifer L Sherr; Jessica Castle; John Pickup; Yarmela Pavlovic; Juan Espinoza; Laurel H Messer; Tim Heise; Carlos E Mendez; Sarah Kim; Barry H Ginsberg; Umesh Masharani; Rodolfo J Galindo; David C Klonoff Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2021-07
Authors: F Boscari; M Vettoretti; F Cavallin; A M L Amato; A Uliana; V Vallone; A Avogaro; A Facchinetti; D Bruttomesso Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 4.256