AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to compare the accuracy of two glucose monitoring devices (Guardian RT and GlucoDay S) against standard microdialysis in Type 1 diabetic patients.
  • Seven male patients were monitored for 26 hours with all three devices placed under the skin, measuring glucose levels during real-life meal scenarios and calibrated to a reference.
  • Results showed varying levels of accuracy, with Guardian RT underestimating blood glucose and GlucoDay S and microdialysis overestimating it, indicating the need for further improvements in glucose monitoring technologies for better diabetes management.

Article Abstract

Aims: To compare the accuracy of two marketed subcutaneous glucose monitoring devices (Guardian RT, GRT; GlucoDay S, GDS) and standard microdialysis (CMA60; MD) in Type 1 diabetic patients.

Methods: Seven male Type diabetic patients were investigated over a period of 26 h simulating real-life meal glucose excursions. Catheters of the three systems were inserted into subcutaneous adipose tissue of the abdominal region. For MD, interstitial fluid was sampled at 30- to 60-min intervals for offline glucose determination. Reference samples were taken at 15- to 60-min intervals. All three systems were prospectively calibrated to reference. Median differences, median absolute relative differences (MARD), median absolute differences (MAD), Bland-Altman plot and Clark Error Grid were used to determine accuracy.

Results: Bland-Altman analysis indicated a mean glucose difference (2 standard deviations) between reference and interstitial glucose of -10.5 (41.8) % for GRT, 20.2 (55.9) % for GDS and 6.5 (35.2) % for MD, respectively. Overall MAD (interquartile range) was 1.07 (0.39; 2.04) mmol/l for GRT, 1.59 (0.54; 3.08) mmol/l for GDS and 0.76 (0.26; 1.58) mmol/l for MD. Overall MARD was 15.0 (5.6; 23.4) % (GRT), 19.7 (6.1; 37.6) % (GDS) and 8.7 (4.1; 18.3) % (MD), respectively. Total sensor failure occurred in two subjects using GRT and one subject using GDS.

Conclusions: The three investigated technologies had comparable performance. Whereas GRT underestimated actual blood glucose, GDS and MD overestimated blood glucose. Considerable deviations during daily life meal glucose excursions from reference glucose were observed for all three investigated technologies. Present technologies may require further improvement until individual data can lead to direct and automated generation of therapeutic advice in diabetes management.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-5491.2009.02924.xDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

type diabetic
12
glucose excursions
12
glucose
11
subcutaneous glucose
8
glucose monitoring
8
diabetic patients
8
meal glucose
8
three systems
8
60-min intervals
8
median absolute
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!