Medizinische Universität Graz Austria/Österreich - Forschungsportal - Medical University of Graz

Logo MUG-Forschungsportal

Gewählte Publikation:

SHR Neuro Krebs Kardio Lipid

Kropff, J; Bruttomesso, D; Doll, W; Farret, A; Galasso, S; Luijf, YM; Mader, JK; Place, J; Boscari, F; Pieber, TR; Renard, E; DeVries, JH.
Accuracy of two continuous glucose monitoring systems: a head-to-head comparison under clinical research centre and daily life conditions.
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2015; 17(4):343-349 [OPEN ACCESS]
Web of Science PubMed PUBMED Central FullText FullText_MUG

 

Autor/innen der Med Uni Graz:
Doll Werner
Mader Julia
Pieber Thomas
Altmetrics:

Dimensions Citations:

Plum Analytics:
Number of Figures: 4
| | | |
Abstract:
To assess the accuracy and reliability of the two most widely used continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems. We studied the Dexcom®G4 Platinum (DG4P; Dexcom, San Diego, CA, USA) and Medtronic Paradigm Veo Enlite system (ENL; Medtronic, Northridge, CA, USA) CGM systems, in 24 patients with type 1 diabetes. The CGM systems were tested during 6-day home use and a nested 6-h clinical research centre (CRC) visit. During the CRC visit, frequent venous blood glucose samples were used as reference while patients received a meal with an increased insulin bolus to induce an aggravated postprandial glucose nadir. At home, patients performed at least six reference capillary blood measurements per day. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test was performed using all data points ≥15 min apart. The overall mean absolute relative difference (MARD) value [standard deviation (s.d.)] measured at the CRC was 13.6 (11.0)% for the DG4P and 16.6 (13.5)% for the ENL [p < 0.0002, confidence interval of difference (CI Δ) 1.7-4.3%, n = 530]. The overall MARD assessed at home was 12.2 (12.0)% for the DG4P and 19.9 (20.5)% for the ENL (p < 0.0001, CI Δ = 5.8-8.7%, n = 839). During the CRC visit, the MARD in the hypoglycaemic range [≤3.9 mmol/l (70 mg/dl)], was 17.6 (12.2)% for the DG4P and 24.6 (18.8)% for the ENL (p = 0.005, CI Δ 3.1-10.7%, n = 117). Both sensors showed higher MARD values during hypoglycaemia than during euglycaemia [3.9-10 mmol/l (70-180 mg/dl)]: for the DG4P 17.6 versus 13.0% and for the ENL 24.6 versus 14.2%. During circumstances of intended use, including both a CRC and home phase, the ENL was noticeably less accurate than the DG4P sensor. Both sensors showed lower accuracy in the hypoglycaemic range. The DG4P was less affected by this negative effect of hypoglycaemia on sensor accuracy than was the ENL. © 2014 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Find related publications in this database (using NLM MeSH Indexing)
Activities of Daily Living -
Adult -
Adult -
Biomedical Research - instrumentation
Blood Glucose - analysis
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 - blood
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 - drug therapy
Female -
Female -
Humans -
Hyperglycemia - diagnosis
Hyperglycemia - prevention & control
Hypoglycemia - chemically induced
Hypoglycemia - diagnosis
Hypoglycemia - prevention & control
Hypoglycemic Agents - administration & dosage
Hypoglycemic Agents - therapeutic use
Injections, Subcutaneous -
Insulin - administration & dosage
Insulin - therapeutic use
Insulin Infusion Systems -
Insulin Infusion Systems -
Male -
Materials Testing -
Middle Aged -
Monitoring, Ambulatory - instrumentation
Monitoring, Ambulatory -
Reproducibility of Results -

Find related publications in this database (Keywords)
type 1 diabetes
CSII
© Meduni Graz Impressum