Literature DB >> 9504590

Multicenter study of oxygen-insensitive handheld glucose point-of-care testing in critical care/hospital/ambulatory patients in the United States and Canada.

G J Kost1, H T Vu, J H Lee, P Bourgeois, F L Kiechle, C Martin, S S Miller, A O Okorodudu, J J Podczasy, R Webster, K J Whitlow.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Existing handheld glucose meters are glucose oxidase (GO)-based. Oxygen side reactions can introduce oxygen dependency, increase potential error, and limit clinical use. Our primary objectives were to: a) introduce a new glucose dehydrogenase (GD)-based electrochemical biosensor for point-of-care testing; b) determine the oxygen-sensitivity of GO- and GD-based electrochemical biosensor test strips; and c) evaluate the clinical performance of the new GD-based glucose meter system in critical care/hospital/ambulatory patients.
DESIGN: Multicenter study sites compared glucose levels determined with GD-based biosensors to glucose levels determined in whole blood with a perchloric acid deproteinization hexokinase reference method. One site also studied GO-based biosensors and venous plasma glucose measured with a chemistry analyzer. Biosensor test strips were used with a handheld glucose monitoring system. Bench and clinical oxygen sensitivity, hematocrit effect, and precision were evaluated.
SETTING: The study was performed at eight U.S. medical centers and one Canadian medical center. PATIENTS: There were 1,248 patients.
RESULTS: The GO-based biosensor was oxygen-sensitive. The new GD-based biosensor was oxygen-insensitive. GD-based biosensor performance was acceptable: 2,104 (96.1%) of 2,189 glucose meter measurements were within +/-15 mg/dL (+/-0.83 mmol/L) for glucose levels of < or = 100 mg/dL (< or = 5.55 mmol/L) or within +/-15% for glucose levels of > 100 mg/dL, compared with the whole-blood reference method results. With the GD-based biosensor, the percentages of glucose measurements that were not within the error tolerance were comparable for different specimen types and clinical groups. Bracket predictive values were acceptable for glucose levels used in therapeutic management.
CONCLUSIONS: The performance of GD-based, oxygen-insensitive, handheld glucose testing was technically suitable for arterial specimens in critical care patients, cord blood and heelstick specimens in neonates, and capillary and venous specimens in other patients. Multicenter findings benchmark the performance of bedside glucose testing devices. With the new +/-15 mg/dL --> 100 mg/dL --> +/-15% accuracy criterion, point-of-care systems for handheld glucose testing should score 95% (or better), as compared with the recommended reference method. Physiologic changes, preanalytical factors, confounding variables, and treatment goals must be taken into consideration when interpreting glucose results, especially in critically ill patients, for whom arterial blood glucose measurements will reflect systemic glucose levels.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9504590     DOI: 10.1097/00003246-199803000-00036

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Crit Care Med        ISSN: 0090-3493            Impact factor:   7.598


  16 in total

Review 1.  Hypoglycemia in critically ill children.

Authors:  E Vincent S Faustino; Eliotte L Hirshberg; Clifford W Bogue
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2012-01-01

Review 2.  Engineered proteins: redox properties and their applications.

Authors:  Shradha Prabhulkar; Hui Tian; Xiaotang Wang; Jun-Jie Zhu; Chen-Zhong Li
Journal:  Antioxid Redox Signal       Date:  2012-06-11       Impact factor: 8.401

3.  Impact of partial pressure of oxygen in blood samples on the performance of systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose.

Authors:  Christina Schmid; Annette Baumstark; Stefan Pleus; Cornelia Haug; Martina Tesar; Guido Freckmann
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 6.118

Review 4.  Factors affecting blood glucose monitoring: sources of errors in measurement.

Authors:  Barry H Ginsberg
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2009-07-01

5.  Thermal stress and point-of-care testing performance: suitability of glucose test strips and blood gas cartridges for disaster response.

Authors:  Richard F Louie; Stephanie L Sumner; Shaunyé Belcher; Ron Mathew; Nam K Tran; Gerald J Kost
Journal:  Disaster Med Public Health Prep       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 1.385

6.  Evaluation of point-of-care glucose testing accuracy using locally-smoothed median absolute difference curves.

Authors:  Gerald J Kost; Nam K Tran; Victor J Abad; Richard F Louie
Journal:  Clin Chim Acta       Date:  2007-12-03       Impact factor: 3.786

7.  Evaluation of the VIA Blood Chemistry Monitor for Glucose in Healthy and Diabetic Volunteers.

Authors:  Arjunan Ganesh; Brian Hipszer; Navdeep Loomba; Barbara Simon; Marc C Torjman; Jeffrey Joseph
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2008-03

8.  Assessing the performance of handheld glucose testing for critical care.

Authors:  Gerald J Kost; Nam K Tran; Richard F Louie; Nicole L Gentile; Victor J Abad
Journal:  Diabetes Technol Ther       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 6.118

9.  Stabilization of quaternary structure of water-soluble quinoprotein glucose dehydrogenase.

Authors:  Satoshi Igarashi; Koji Sode
Journal:  Mol Biotechnol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 2.695

Review 10.  Interferences and Limitations in Blood Glucose Self-Testing: An Overview of the Current Knowledge.

Authors:  Michael Erbach; Guido Freckmann; Rolf Hinzmann; Bernhard Kulzer; Ralph Ziegler; Lutz Heinemann; Oliver Schnell
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2016-08-22
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.