Choice of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems May Affect Metrics: Clinically Relevant Differences in Times in Ranges
- PMID: 33511578
- DOI: 10.1055/a-1347-2550
Choice of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems May Affect Metrics: Clinically Relevant Differences in Times in Ranges
Abstract
Background: Continuous glucose monitoring-derived parameters are becoming increasingly important in the treatment of people with diabetes. The aim of this study was to assess whether these parameters, as calculated from different continuous glucose monitoring systems worn in parallel, are comparable. In addition, clinical relevance of differences was investigated.
Methods: A total of 24 subjects wore a FreeStyle Libre (A) and a Dexcom G5 (B) sensor in parallel for 7 days. Mean glucose, coefficient of variation, glucose management indicator and time spent in different glucose ranges were calculated for each system. Pairwise differences between the two different continuous glucose monitoring systems were computed for these metrics.
Results: On average, the two CGM systems indicated an identical time in range (67.9±10.2 vs. 67.9±11.5%) and a similar coefficient of variation; both categorized as unstable (38.1±5.9 vs. 36.0±4.8%). In contrast, the mean time spent below and above range, as well as the individual times spent below, in and above range differed substantially. System A indicated about twice the time spent below range than system B (7.7±7.2 vs. 3.8±2.7%, p=0.003). This could have led to different therapy recommendations in approximately half of the subjects.
Discussion: The differences in metrics found between the two continuous glucose monitoring systems may result in different therapy recommendations. In order to make adequate clinical decisions, measurement performance of CGM systems should be standardized and all available information, including the HbA1c, should be utilized.
Thieme. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
G.F. is general manager of the Institut für Diabetes-Technologie Forschungs- und Entwicklungsgesellschaft mbH an der Universität Ulm (IfDT, Ulm, Germany), which carries out clinical studies on the evaluation of BG meters and medical devices for diabetes therapy on its own initiative and on behalf of various companies. G.F./IfDT have received speakers' honoraria or consulting fees from Abbott, Ascensia, Dexcom, i-SENS, LifeScan, Menarini Diagnostics, Metronom Health, Novo Nordisk, PharmaSense, Roche, Sanofi, Sensile and Ypsomed. S.P., S.S., M.L., N.J., D.W. and C.H. are employees of IfDT or were employees at the time the study was conducted. A.S. is employee of Ascensia Diabetes Care, NJ, US.
Comment in
-
Data Obtained with Early Generations of CGM Sensors: Comment on Pleus et al.J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2022 May;16(3):792-793. doi: 10.1177/19322968211033654. Epub 2021 Jul 21. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2022. PMID: 34284604 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
-
Response to Seibold: Data Obtained With Early Generations of CGM Sensors: Comment on Pleus et al.J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2022 May;16(3):794-795. doi: 10.1177/19322968211037299. Epub 2021 Aug 3. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2022. PMID: 34344227 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical