Dataset Information

Determinants of the accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring in non-critically ill patients with heart failure or severe hyperglycemia.

ABSTRACT: The accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in non-critically ill hospitalized patients with heart failure or severe hyperglycemia (SH) is unknown.Hospitalized patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) exacerbation (receiving IV or subcutaneous insulin) or SH requiring insulin infusion were compared to outpatients referred for retrospective CGM.Forty-three patients with CHF, 15 patients with SH, and 88 outpatients yielded 470, 164, and 2150 meter-sensor pairs, respectively. Admission glucose differed (188 versus 509 mg/dl in CHF and SH, p < .001) but not the first sensor glucose (p = .35). In continuous glucose error grid analysis, 67-78% of pairs during hypoglycemia were in zones A+B (p = .63), compared with 98-100% in euglycemia (p < .001) and 98%, 92%, and 99% (p = .001) during hyperglycemia for the CHF, SH, and outpatient groups, respectively. Mean absolute relative difference (MARD) was lower in the CHF versus the SH group in glucose strata above 100 mg/dl, but there was no difference between the CHF and outpatient groups. Linear regression models showed that CHF versus outpatient, SH versus CHF, and coefficient of variation were significant predictors of higher MARD. Among subjects with CHF, MARD was not associated with brain natriuretic peptide or change in plasma volume, but it was significantly higher in subjects randomized to IV insulin (p = .04).The results suggest that SH and glycemic variability are more important determinants of CGM accuracy than known CHF status alone in hospitalized patients.

SUBMITTER: Dungan KM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3440160 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Determinants of the accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring in non-critically ill patients with heart failure or severe hyperglycemia.

Dungan Kathleen M KM Han Wen W Miele Anthony A Zeidan Trisha T Weiland Karen K

Journal of diabetes science and technology 20120701 4

<h4>Background</h4>The accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in non-critically ill hospitalized patients with heart failure or severe hyperglycemia (SH) is unknown.<h4>Methods</h4>Hospitalized patients with congestive heart failure (CHF) exacerbation (receiving IV or subcutaneous insulin) or SH requiring insulin infusion were compared to outpatients referred for retrospective CGM.<h4>Results</h4>Forty-three patients with CHF, 15 patients with SH, and 88 outpatients yielded 470, 164, an ...[more]

PMID: 22920815

Similar Datasets

Project description:Hyperglycemia is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients and strict glycemic control has become standard care for adults. Recent studies have questioned the optimal targets for such management and reported increased rates of iatrogenic hypoglycemia in both critically ill children and adults. The ability to provide accurate, real-time continuous glucose monitoring would improve the efficacy and safety of this practice in critically ill patients. The aim of our study is to determine if a continuous, interstitial glucose monitor will correlate with blood glucose values in critically ill children.We evaluated 50 critically ill children age 6 weeks to 16 years old with a commercially available continuous glucose monitor (CGM; Medtronic Guardian®). CGM values and standard blood glucose (BG) values were compared. During the study, no changes in patient management were made based on CGM readings alone.Forty-seven patients had analyzable CGM data. A total of 1,555 CGM and routine BG measurements were compared using Clarke error grid and Bland-Altman analysis. For all readings, 97.9% were within clinically acceptable agreement. The mean absolute relative difference between CGM and BG readings was 15.3%. For the 1,555 paired CGM and BG measurements, there is a statistically significant linear relationship between CGM values and BG (P < .0001). A high degree of clinical agreement existed in three subpopulation analyses based on age, illness severity, and support measures. This included some of our smallest patients (that is, < 12 months old), those who required vasopressors, and those who were treated for critical illness hyperglycemia.In one of the largest studies to date, in a highly vulnerable ICU population, CGM values have a clinically acceptable correlation with the BG values now used diagnostically and therapeutically. Our data contest the theoretical concerns posed by some regarding CGM use in the ICU. The existing medical evidence may now support a role for CGM devices in the identification and management of hyperglycemia in diverse ICU settings.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has not yet been implemented in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. The purpose of this study was to evaluate reliability, feasibility, nurse acceptance and accuracy of the Medtronic Sentrino(®) CGM system in critically ill patients. METHODS:Sensors were inserted into the subcutaneous tissue of the patient's thigh, quantifying interstitial glucose concentration for up to 72 h per sensor. Reliability and feasibility analysis included frequency of data display, data gaps and reasons for sensor removal. We surveyed nurse acceptance in a questionnaire. For the accuracy analysis, we compared sensor values to glucose values obtained via blood gas analysis. Potential benefits of CGM were investigated in intra-individual analyses of factors, such as glycemic variability or time in target range achieved with CGM compared to that achieved with intermittent glucose monitoring. RESULTS:The device generated 68,655 real-time values from 31 sensors in 20 critically ill patients. 532 comparative blood glucose values were collected. Data were displayed during 32.5 h [16.0/62.4] per sensor, which is 45.1 % of the expected time of 72 h and 84.8 % of 37.9 h actual monitoring time. 21 out of 31 sensors were removed prematurely. 79.1 % of the nursing staff rated the device as not beneficial; the response rate was one-third. Mean absolute relative difference was 15.3 % (CI 13.5-17.0 %). Clarke error grid: 76.9 % zone A, 21.6 % zone B, 0.2 % zone C, 0.9 % zone D, 0.4 % zone E. Bland-Altman plot: mean bias +0.53 mg/dl, limits of agreement +64.6 and -63.5 mg/dl. Accuracy deteriorated during elevated glycemic variability and in the hyperglycemic range. There was no reduction in dysglycemic events during CGM compared to 72 h before and after CGM. If CGM was measuring accurately, it identified more hyperglycemic events when compared to intermittent measurements. This study was not designed to evaluate potential benefits of CGM on glucose control. CONCLUSIONS:The subcutaneous CGM system did not perform with satisfactory accuracy, feasibility, or nursing acceptance when evaluated in 20 medical-surgical ICU patients. Low point accuracy and prolonged data gaps significantly limited the potential clinical usefulness of the CGM trend data. Accurate continuous data display, with a MARD < 14 %, showed potential benefits in a subgroup of our patients. Trial registration NCT02296372; Ethic vote Charité EA2/095/14.

Dataset Information

Determinants of the accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring in non-critically ill patients with heart failure or severe hyperglycemia.

Publications

Determinants of the accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring in non-critically ill patients with heart failure or severe hyperglycemia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets