None of the studies concerned with the performance of a continuous glucose monitor (CGM) over time has examined the extent to which extended periods of wear affect the responses of both CGM accuracy and lag time to rapid changes in blood glucose levels. Here we propose a novel approach to address these issues.
Methods:
Eight participants without diabetes were each fitted with two CGMs (Paradigm® 722 Real-Time [Medtronic, Northridge, CA]; abdominal and triceps regions) and completed fasted oral glucose challenges (OGCs) on six occasions over a 9-day period, while the CGMs were worn without removal. Arterialized blood samples were collected for comparison with CGM values.
Results:
There were marked mismatches and lag times between blood glucose and CGM values in response to all OGCs, most notably during the initial rapid increase in glucose levels. Abdominal and triceps CGMs consistently underestimated peak blood glucose by an average of 2.7±0.2 and 2.9±0.2 mM, respectively, and were associated with a peak blood glucose lag of 21.6±1.8 and 18.1±1.6 min, respectively. CGM accuracy did not deteriorate over 9 days of wear in OGCs for either the abdominal or triceps sensor. All participants found the triceps sensor site more comfortable than the abdominal site (P<0.05).
Conclusions:
The current CGM sensor tested here may be used for extended periods, providing added economic benefits for the wearer. However, the marked inaccuracy and lag time of CGM readings when blood glucose levels change rapidly within the physiological range must be considered for optimal CGM use in glycemic management.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Continuous Glucose Monitoring StudyGroup, TamborlaneWV, BeckRW, BodeBW, BuckinghamB, ChaseHP, ClemonsR, Fiallo-ScharerR, FoxLA, GilliamLK, HirschIB, HuangES, KollmanC, KowalskiAJ, LaffelL, LawrenceJM, LeeJ, MaurasN, O'GradyM, RuedyKJ, TanseyM, TsalikianE, WeinzimerS, WilsonDM, WolpertH, WysockiT, XingD. Continuous glucose monitoring and intensive treatment of type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med, 2008; 359:1464–1476.
2.
GargSK, SchwartzS, EdelmanSV. Improved glucose excursions using an implantable real-time continuous glucose sensor in adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2004; 27:734–738.
3.
DeissD, HartmannR, SchmidtJ, KordonouriO. Results of a randomised controlled cross-over trial on the effect of continuous subcutaneous glucose monitoring (CGMS) on glycaemic control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes, 2006; 114:63–67.
4.
McGarraughG. The chemistry of commercial continuous glucose monitors. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2009; 11,Suppl 1:S17–S24.
5.
Nyback-NakellA, von HeijneM, AdamsonU, LinsPE, Landstedt-HallinL. Accuracy of continuous nocturnal glucose screening after 48 and 72 hours in type 2 diabetes patients on combined oral and insulin therapy. Diabetes Metab, 2004; 30:517–521.
6.
GuerciB, FloriotM, BohmeP, DurainD, BenichouM, JellimannS, DrouinP. Clinical performance of CGMS in type 1 diabetic patients treated by continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion using insulin analogs. Diabetes Care, 2003; 26:582–589.
7.
FeldmanB, BrazgR, SchwartzS, WeinsteinR. A continuous glucose sensor based on wired enzyme technology—results from a 3-day trial in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2003; 5:769–779.
8.
MastrototaroJ, ShinJ, MarcusA, SulurG. STAR 1 Clinical Trial Investigators: The accuracy and efficacy of real-time continuous glucose monitoring sensor in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2008; 10:385–390.
9.
Diabetes Research in Children Network (DirecNet) Study Group:. The accuracy of the CGMS in children with type 1 diabetes: Results of the Diabetes Research in Children Network (DirecNet) accuracy study. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2003; 5:781–789.
10.
WeinsteinR, SchwartzSL, BrazgRL, BuglerJR, PeyserTA, McGarraughGV. Accuracy of the 5-day FreeStyle navigator continuous glucose monitoring system: comparison with frequent laboratory reference measurements. Diabetes Care, 2007; 30:1125–1130.
11.
WilsonDM, BeckRW, TamborlaneWV, DontchevMJ, KollmanC, ChaseP, FoxLA, RuedyKJ, TsalikianE, WeinzimerSA. DirecNet Study Group. The accuracy of the FreeStyle Navigator continuous glucose monitoring system in children with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2007; 30:59–64.
12.
WongLJ, BuckinghamBA, KunselmanB, IstocE, LeachJ, PurvisR. Extended use of a new continuous glucose monitoring system with wireless data transmission in children with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2006; 8:139–145.
13.
PeoplesT, BaileyT, RonaldB, ZisserHC, JanowskiB, HuangS, TalbotC, YangQ. Accuracy performance of the Medtronic NexSensor for 6 days in an inpatient setting using abdomen and buttocks insertion sites. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2011; 5:358–364.
14.
ChlupR, JelenovaD, ChlupovaK, ZapletalovaJ, ChlupovaL, BartekJ. Function and accuracy of glucose sensors beyond their stated expiry date. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2006; 8:495–504.
15.
GargSK, VoelmleMK, GottliebP. Feasibility of 10-day use of a continuous glucose-monitoring system in adults with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2009; 32:436–438.
16.
BolandE, MonsodT, DeluciaM, BrandtCA, FernandoS, TamborlaneWV. Limitations of conventional methods of self-monitoring of blood glucose: lessons learned from 3 days of continuous glucose sensing in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2001; 24:1858–1862.
17.
BoyneMS, SilverDM, KaplanJ, SaudekCD. Timing of changes in interstitial and venous blood glucose measured with a continuous subcutaneous glucose sensor. Diabetes, 2003; 52:2790–2794.
18.
DaveyRJ, LowCY, FournierPA. The contribution of an intrinsic lag of CGMS to differences in measured and actual glucose concentrations changing at variable rates in vitro. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2010; 4:1393–1399.
19.
AussedatB, Dupire-AngelM, GiffordR, KleinJC, WilsonGS, ReachG. Interstitial glucose concentration and glycemia: implications for continuous subcutaneous glucose monitoring. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab, 2000; 278:E716–E728.
20.
McGowanK, ThomasW, MoranA. Spurious reporting of nocturnal hypoglycemia by CGMS in patients with tightly controlled type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 2002; 25:1499–1503.
21.
GargS, ZisserH, SchwartzS, BaileyT, KaplanR, EllisS, JovanovicL. Improvement in glycemic excursions with a transcutaneous, real-time continuous glucose sensor: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care, 2006; 29:44–50.
22.
KluehU, KaurM, MontroseDC, KreutzerDL. Inflammation and glucose sensors: use of dexamethasone to extend glucose sensor function and life span in vivo. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2007; 1:496–504.
23.
WilsonGS, GiffordR. Biosensors for real-time in vivo measurements. Biosens Bioelectron, 2005; 20:2388–2403.
24.
RebrinK, FischerU, Hahn von DorscheH, von WoetkeT, AbelP, BrunsteinE. Subcutaneous glucose monitoring by means of electrochemical sensors: fiction or reality?J Biomed Eng, 1992; 14:33–40.
25.
WoodwardSC. How fibroblasts and giant cells encapsulate implants: considerations in design of glucose sensors. Diabetes Care, 1982; 5:278–281.
26.
AndersonJM. Mechanisms of inflammation and infection with implanted devices. Cardiovasc Pathol, 1993; 2,3 Suppl:33S–41S.
27.
LesperanceLM, SpektorA, McLeodKJ. Calibration of the continuous glucose monitoring system for transient glucose monitoring. Diabetes Technol Ther, 2007; 9:183–190.
28.
UpdikeSJ, ShultsMC, GilliganBJ, RhodesRK. A subcutaneous glucose sensor with improved longevity, dynamic range, and stability of calibration. Diabetes Care, 2000; 23:208–214.
29.
KoschwanezHE, YapFY, KlitzmanB, ReichertWM. In vitro and in vivo characterization of porous poly-l-lactic acid coatings for subcutaneously implanted glucose sensors. J Biomed Mater Res A, 2008; 87:792–807.
30.
UpdikeSJ, ShultsMC, RhodesRK, GilliganBJ, LuebowJO, von HeimburgD. Enzymatic glucose sensors. Improved long-term performance in vitro and in vivo. ASAIO J, 1994; 40:157–163.
31.
SharkawyAA, KlitzmanB, TruskeyGA, ReichertWM. Engineering the tissue which encapsulates subcutaneous implants. I. Diffusion properties. J Biomed Mater Res, 1997; 37:401–412.
32.
NortonLW, KoschwanezHE, WisniewskiNA, KlitzmanB, ReichertWM. Vascular endothelial growth factor and dexamethasone release from nonfouling sensor coatings affect the foreign body response. J Biomed Mater Res A, 2007; 81:858–869.
SternbergF, MeyerhoffC, MennelFJ, MayerH, BischofF, PfeifferEF. Does fall in tissue glucose precede fall in blood glucose?Diabetologia, 1996; 39:609–612.
35.
TamadaJA, GargS, JovanovicL, PitzerKR, FermiS, PottsRO. Noninvasive glucose monitoring: comprehensive clinical results. Cygnus Research Team. JAMA, 1999; 282:1839–1844.
36.
Thome-DuretV, ReachG, GangnerauMN, LemonnierF, KleinJC, ZhangY, HuY, WilsonGS. Use of a subcutaneous glucose sensor to detect decreases in glucose concentration prior to observation in blood. Anal Chem, 1996; 68:3822–3826.
37.
Thome-DuretV, GangnerauMN, ZhangY, WilsonGS, ReachG. Modification of the sensitivity of glucose sensor implanted into subcutaneous tissue. Diabetes Metab, 1996; 22:174–178.
38.
KeenanDB, CartayaR, MastrototaroJJ. Accuracy of a new real-time continuous glucose monitoring algorithm. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2010; 4:111–118.
39.
KingAB, ArmstrongD, ChuC, SharmaM, PriceD. Agreement between glucose trends derived from three simultaneously worn continuous glucose sensors. J Diabetes Sci Technol, 2008; 2:839–849.
