RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGMs) have been commercially available since 1999. However, automated insulin delivery systems may benefit from real-time inputs in addition to glucose. Continuous multi-analyte sensing platforms will meet this area of potential growth without increasing the burden of additional devices. We aimed to generate pilot data regarding the safety and function of a first-in-human, single-probe glucose/lactate multi-analyte continuous sensor. METHODS: The investigational glucose/lactate continuous multi-analyte sensor (PercuSense Inc, Valencia, California) was inserted to the upper arms of 16 adults with diabetes, and data were available for analysis from 11 of these participants (seven female; mean [SD] = age 43 years [16]; body mass index [BMI] = 27 kg/m2 [5]). A commercially available Guardian 3 CGM (Medtronic, Northridge, California) was also inserted into the abdomen for comparison. All participants underwent a meal-test followed by an exercise challenge on day 1 and day 4 of wear. Performance was benchmarked against venous blood YSI glucose and lactate values. RESULTS: The investigational glucose sensor had an overall mean absolute relative difference (MARD) of 14.5% (median = 11.2%) which improved on day 4 compared with day 1 (13.9% vs 15.2%). The Guardian 3 CGM had an overall MARD of 13.9% (median = 9.4%). The lactate sensor readings within 20/20% and 40/40% of YSI values were 59.7% and 83.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our initial data support safety and functionality of a novel glucose/lactate continuous multi-analyte sensor. Further sensor refinement will improve run-in performance and accuracy.
RESUMEN
Diabetes is the leading cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage kidney disease in the world. It is known that maintaining optimal glycemic control can slow the progression of CKD. However, the failing kidney impacts glucose and insulin metabolism and contributes to increased glucose variability. Conventional methods of insulin delivery are not well equipped to adapt to this increased glycemic lability. Automated insulin delivery (AID) has been established as an effective treatment in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, and there is emerging evidence for their use in type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, few studies have examined their role in diabetes with concurrent advanced CKD. We discuss the potential benefits and challenges of AID use in patients with diabetes and advanced CKD, including those on dialysis.
RESUMEN
AIMS: To compare meal-time glycaemia in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) managed with multiple daily injections (MDI) vs. insulin pump therapy (IPT), using self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG), following diabetes education. METHODS: Adults with T1D received carbohydrate-counting education and a bolus calculator: MDI (Roche Aviva Expert) and IPT (pump bolus calculator). All then wore 3-weeks of masked-CGM (Enlite, Medtronic). Meal-times were assessed by two approaches: 1) Set time-blocks (breakfast 06:00-10:00hrs; lunch 11:00-15:00hrs; dinner 17:00-21:00hrs) and 2) Bolus-calculator carbohydrate entries signalling meal commencement. Post-meal masked-CGM time-in-range (TIR) 3.9-10.0 mmol/L was the primary outcome. RESULTS: MDI(n = 61) and IPT (n = 59) participants were equivalent in age, sex, diabetes duration and HbA1c. Median (IQR) education time provided did not differ (MDI: 1.1 h (0.75, 1.5) vs. IPT: 1.1 h (1.0, 2.0); p = 0.86). Overall, daytime (06:00-24:00hrs), lunch and dinner TIR did not differ for MDI vs. IPT participants but was greater for breakfast with IPT in both analyses with a mean difference of 12.8%, (95 CI 4.8, 20.9); p = 0.002 (time-block analysis). CONCLUSION: After diabetes education, MDI and IPT use were associated with similar day-time glycemia, though IPT users had significantly greater TIR during the breakfast period. With education, meal-time glucose levels are comparable with use of MDI vs. pumps.