Interstitial Glucose Monitoring Research Articles

Gastric emptying of a glucose drink is predictive of the glycaemic response to oral glucose and mixed meals, but unrelated to antecedent glycaemic control, in type 2 diabetes.

Gastric emptying (GE), with wide inter-individual but lesser intra-individual variations, is a major determinant of postprandial glycaemia in health and type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, it is uncertain whether GE of a carbohydrate-containing liquid meal is predictive of the glycaemic response to physiological meals, and whether antecedent hyperglycaemia influences GE in T2D. We evaluated the relationships of (i) the glycaemic response to both a glucose drink and mixed meals with GE of a 75 g glucose drink, and (ii) GE of a glucose drink with antecedent glycaemic control, in T2D. Fifty-five treatment-naive Chinese adults with newly diagnosed T2D consumed standardised meals at breakfast, lunch and dinner with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring. On the subsequent day, a 75 g glucose drink containing 150 mg 13C-acetate was ingested to assess GE (breath test) and plasma glucose response. Serum fructosamine and HbA1c were also measured. Plasma glucose incremental area under the curve (iAUC) within 2 hours after oral glucose was related inversely to the gastric half-emptying time (T50) (r = -0.34, P = 0.012). The iAUCs for interstitial glucose within 2 hours after breakfast (r = -0.34, P = 0.012) and dinner (r = -0.28, P = 0.040) were also related inversely to the T50 of oral glucose. The latter, however, was unrelated to antecedent fasting plasma glucose, 24-hour mean interstitial glucose, serum fructosamine, or HbA1c. In newly diagnosed, treatment-naive, Chinese with T2D, GE of a 75 g glucose drink predicts the glycaemic response to both a glucose drink and mixed meals, but is not influenced by spontaneous short-, medium- or longer-term elevation in glycaemia.

Performance of an interstitial glucose monitoring in patients with type 1 diabetes during haemodialysis

Abstract Background The use of interstitial glucose monitoring devices such as Flash Glucose Monitoring has been shown to be beneficial in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1DM). However, these devices have been little studied in patients with diabetes treated by chronic haemodialysis (HD). Methods The goal of this prospective, observational, multicentric, study was to evaluate the analytical performance of the FreeStyle Libre® 2 (FSL2) sensor in T1DM patients during HD sessions. During three HD sessions, interstitial glucose concentrations (ISFG) given by the FSL2 were compared, every 15 minutes, with blood glucose concentration (BG) obtained simultaneously. BG concentrations were measured by two different glucometers: the Accu-Chek Guide® and the StatStrip® meter. Results Twelve hemodialysis patients were included. Mean age was 54 ± 11 years. Mean diabetes duration was 36.5 ± 11.6 years and dialysis vintage was 35 ± 22 months. A total of 565 pairs of ISFG/BG values were available for analysis. The mean absolute relative difference, defined as the mean of the absolute relative differences between the ISFG and BG measurements, was 17.4% and 20.9% when the ISFG were compared to the StatStrip glucometer or Accu-Chek Guide, respectively. Interstitial results tend to underestimate blood results but all values were classified as having clinically acceptable error. The differences observed remained stable during the dialysis session and were not associated with the ultrafiltration rate. Conclusion The use of the FSL2 interstitial glucose monitoring device in HD patients with T1DM is clinically acceptable, even though the accuracy of the device is generally poorer than in studies including non-dialysis patients.

Impedance-based polymer microneedle patch sensor for continuous interstitial fluid glucose monitoring

Early detection and effective blood glucose control are critical for preventing and managing diabetes-related complications. Conventional glucometers provide point-in-time measurements but are painful and cannot facilitate continuous monitoring. Continuous glucose monitoring systems are comfortable but face challenges in terms of accuracy, cost, and sensor lifespan. This study aimed to develop a microneedle-based sensor patch for minimally invasive, painless, and continuous glucose monitoring in the interstitial fluid to address these limitations. Experimental results confirm painless and minimally invasive penetration of the skin tissue with cylindrical microneedles (3 × 3 array) to a depth of approximately 520 μm with minimal loading. The microneedle sensors fabricated with precision using the complementary metal-oxide semiconductor process were immobilized with glucose oxidase, as confirmed through phase angle analysis. Long-term tests confirmed the effective operation of the sensor for up to seven days. Glucose concentrations determined from the fitted concentration–impedance curves correlated well with those measured using commercial glucometers, indicating the reliability and precision of the microneedle sensor. The flexible and minimally invasive sensor developed in this study facilitates painless and continuous glucose monitoring.

Blood glucose monitoring devices: current considerations.

Measuring blood glucose concentrations via capillary (fingerprick) blood glucose monitoring or continuous (interstitial) glucose monitoring is an important aspect of management for many people with diabetes. Blood glucose monitoring informs patient self-management strategies, which can improve the patient's engagement in their own care and reduce barriers to achieving recommended blood glucose targets. Blood glucose monitoring also informs clinician-guided management plans. Compared to capillary blood glucose monitoring, continuous glucose monitoring in people using insulin significantly improves glycaemic metrics and is associated with improved patient-reported outcomes. Even with good glycaemic metrics, patients using continuous glucose monitoring should still have access to capillary blood glucose monitoring for correlation of hypoglycaemic readings when accuracy may be compromised or if there is a malfunction with the continuous blood glucose monitor.

Continuous interstitial glucose monitoring for term newborns: analysis of the first day of life

ObjectiveGlycaemia in newborns changes significantly after birth; however, little is known about these changes. The objective was to describe continuous interstitial glucose values in term newborns who were exclusively breast...

Assessment of the FreeStyle Libre 2 interstitial glucose monitor in hypo- and euglycemic cats.

Continuous glucose monitoring systems have been validated for eu- and hyperglycemic cats. The FreeStyle Libre 2 (FSL2) is sufficiently accurate in people during hypoglycemia to guide critical treatment decisions without confirmation of blood glucose concentration (BG). Assess FSL2 accuracy in cats with hypoglycemia. Nine healthy, purpose-bred cats. Hyperinsulinemic-hypoglycemic clamps were performed by IV infusion of regular insulin (constant rate) and glucose (variable rate). Interstitial glucose concentration (IG), measured by FSL2, was compared to BG measured by AlphaTrak2. Data were analyzed for all paired measurements (n = 364) and separately during stable BG (≤1 mg/dL/min change over 10 minutes). Pearson's r test, Bland-Altman test, and Parkes Error Grid analysis respectively were used to determine correlation, bias, and clinical accuracy (P < .05 considered significant). Overall, BG and IG correlated strongly (r = 0.83, P < .0001) in stable glycemia and moderately at all rates of change (r = 0.69, P < .0001). Interstitial glucose concentration underestimated BG in euglycemia, but the BG-IG difference was progressively smaller as BG decreased (12.9 ± 12.2, 8.8 ± 11.2, -3.2 ± 7.4, and -7.8 ± 5.2 mg/dL in the ranges of 80-120 [n = 64], 60-79 [n = 29], 50-59 [n = 71], and 29-49 mg/dL [n = 53], respectively). Although IG underestimates BG throughout most of the hypo-euglycemic range, IG generally overestimates BG in marked hypoglycemia (<60 mg/dL). It is therefore imperative to evaluate FSL2 results in this critical range with caution.

Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus.

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed. The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus.

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association for Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of HbA1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed. The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

Executive Summary: Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus.

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in patients with diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments in the full version of the guideline). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association for Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the patients measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring devices and also by laboratory analysis of HbA1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring; genetic testing; and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed. The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

Executive Summary: Guidelines and Recommendations for Laboratory Analysis in the Diagnosis and Management of Diabetes Mellitus.

Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in patients with diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments in the full version of the guideline). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association. Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the patients measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring devices and also by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring; genetic testing; and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed. The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.

Interstitial glucose monitoring has acceptable clinical accuracy in juvenile dogs.

To compare the performance of an interstitial glucose monitor (IGM) versus a portable blood glucose monitor (PBGM) in sick juvenile dogs in a veterinary ICU. 16 client-owned dogs admitted to the university teaching hospital under 1 year of age with systemic illness. Paired interstitial and blood glucose samples were collected. A third glucose measurement with a reference method was obtained when IGM and PBGM values were clinically disparate. Analytical accuracy was measured by Pearson correlation and agreement statistics, including mean absolute relative difference (MARD), bias, and 95% limits of agreement. The Parkes consensus error grid analysis was performed to assess clinical accuracy. 159 paired glucose measurements were available for analysis. Comparison of IGM readings to PBGM measurements resulted in an MARD of 15.4% and bias of -2.6%, with the 95% limits of agreement ranging from -42.5% to 37.4%. Positive correlation between IGM and PBGM (Pearson r = 0.65) was found. On consensus error grid analysis, 100% of the pairs fell into clinically acceptable zones (74.2% in zone A, and 25.8% in zone B). When disparate IGM and PBGM readings were compared to a laboratory reference standard (n = 13), both methods resulted in high MARD and wide limits of agreement. The IGM provides clinically acceptable glucose measurements compared to PBGM to monitor glucose levels in juvenile dogs in a clinical setting. Further clinical studies with a larger sample size, particularly in the hypoglycemic range, are needed to assess IGM performance in the lower glucose range.

Interstitial glucose monitoring in people with diabetes.

Interstitial glucose monitoring in people with diabetes.

Hip sensor location for flash interstitial glucose monitoring system provides adequate clinical accuracy in non-diabetic hypoglycemic dogs.

Flash glucose monitoring systems (FGMS) are frequently used for interstitial glucose monitoring in dogs with diabetes mellitus and are typically placed between the scapulae. We aimed to evaluate the variability between glucose measurements from FGMS placed in 2 locations (between the scapulae and over the hip) in non-diabetic dogs during rapidly induced hypoglycemia. 24 apparently healthy colony dogs that were subjects in a teaching laboratory. Prospective interventional study. FGMS sensors (FreeStyle Libre 14-day system) were placed between the scapulae and over the hip of all dogs. Regular insulin was administered (0.3 u/kg IV) and subsequent hypoglycemia was corrected. Before insulin administration and every 10 minutes over 90 minutes, interstitial glucose was recorded from both locations, and blood glucose was measured with a point-of-care blood glucose monitor (AlphaTRAK 2). There was a constant bias of 5.6 mg/dL (95% limits of agreement: -26.3 to 37.5 mg/dL) between locations, but the proportional bias was not apparent. There was a correlation between FGMS locations (r = 0.731, P = < .001). Sensor site B was clinically accurate with 100% of paired samples within Parkes error grid zones A (83%) and B (17%) but did not meet the criteria for analytical accuracy. In this model of induced hypoglycemia in healthy dogs, variation between measurements from FGMS locations was unlikely to have affected the clinical outcome. Placement of FGMS over the hip may be an acceptable alternative to placement between the scapulae, but the utility in hyperglycemic dogs is unknown.

0003 Sleep and Circadian Disruption Induced by Simulated Night Shift Work Impair Cardiometabolic Outcomes in Healthy Adults

Abstract Introduction People who work evening, night or rotating shifts make up 20% of the US workforce and have a heightened risk for Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and cardiovascular disease (CVD) compared to people who work days, possibly due to repeated bouts of sleep and circadian disruption. However, the mechanism(s) by which sleep and circadian disruption impair cardiometabolic health are unclear. We therefore investigated the impact of acute circadian misalignment on factors related to cardiometabolic health including interstitial glucose concentration, glucose tolerance, resting systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and heart rate (HR). Methods Ten healthy adults (6F, 25.0±4.5y, BMI: 22.0±2.2kg/m2; mean±SD) participated in an ongoing 6d inpatient simulated night shift protocol to induce sleep and circadian disruption. Participants lived at the Sleep and Metabolism Laboratory for 2d to simulate day shift work followed by 2d of simulated night shift work. Continuous interstitial glucose monitoring was conducted throughout the study (FreeStyle Libre Pro; Abbott, Alameda, CA, USA). BP and HR were assessed 30 minutes after waketime (Omron HEM-FL31; Omron Healthcare, Kyoto, JP) followed by an oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTT) conducted 1.5h after waketime in both conditions. Results Simulated night shift work was associated with significantly higher interstitial glucose area under the curve (AUC) in response to an identical first meal after waking (18,299±1412 v 14,606±2035 [mg/dl]*min; p=0.009; mean±SEM) as well as plasma glucose AUC during the OGTT (23,239±2574 v 18,776±1832; p=0.002) compared to simulated day work. Furthermore, simulated night shift work was associated with a significant increase in resting DBP (75±3 v 66±2; p=0.017) compared to day work. No changes were observed in resting SBP (p=0.40) or HR (p=0.11) between conditions. Conclusion Sleep and circadian disruption induced by simulated night shift work appear to impair markers of cardiometabolic health, even in healthy, lean adults. Night shift work is largely unavoidable in modern society, thus is it critical to identify strategies or countermeasures to prevent the impact of circadian misalignment on T2D and CVD risk in a large portion of the population. Support (if any) This project was supported in part by R01DK125653 &amp; F31HL165883.

Continuous glucose monitoring assessment in patients suffering from anorexia nervosa reveals chronic prolonged mild hypoglycemia all over the nycthemeron.

Anorexia nervosa (AN) is an eating disorder characterised by voluntary dietary restriction leading to severe undernutrition. Hypoglycaemia is mostly described through severe case reports and is always evaluated by fasting or post-meal blood glucose, showing nothing about hypoglycaemia's length or duration. The interest of continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM), largely used in diabetes mellitus, has never been evaluated in AN patients. Glycaemia cycles in AN patients were assessed using CGM over 5days and then analysed according to food intake. Mean glycaemia was within normal range. 91% of the patients presented with at least one episode with glycaemia under 70mg/dl. Within the 24h, the percentage of time spent with a glycaemia under 70mg/dl was of 20.82±3.90% with a maximum of 52%. We found 2.52±0.33 hypoglycaemia events per 24h, including 21.11±3.76% at night. CGM parameters correlated with cortisol and IGF1 plasma levels. Comparison with estimated carbohydrate intakes discriminated concordant and non-concordant estimations depending on patient. AN patients display chronic prolonged mild hypoglycaemia all over the nycthemeron despite normal fasting glycaemia. Associated adaptive increased counter-regulatory hormones might protect AN patients from deeper hypoglycaemia. CGM allowed testing food intake self-estimation reliability of AN patients and could be a very useful biofeedback tool.

Digital Biomarkers for Personalized Nutrition: Predicting Meal Moments and Interstitial Glucose with Non-Invasive, Wearable Technologies

Digital health technologies may support the management and prevention of disease through personalized lifestyle interventions. Wearables and smartphones are increasingly used to continuously monitor health and disease in everyday life, targeting health maintenance. Here, we aim to demonstrate the potential of wearables and smartphones to (1) detect eating moments and (2) predict and explain individual glucose levels in healthy individuals, ultimately supporting health self-management. Twenty-four individuals collected continuous data from interstitial glucose monitoring, food logging, activity, and sleep tracking over 14 days. We demonstrated the use of continuous glucose monitoring and activity tracking in detecting eating moments with a prediction model showing an accuracy of 92.3% (87.2-96%) and 76.8% (74.3-81.2%) in the training and test datasets, respectively. Additionally, we showed the prediction of glucose peaks from food logging, activity tracking, and sleep monitoring with an overall mean absolute error of 0.32 (+/-0.04) mmol/L for the training data and 0.62 (+/-0.15) mmol/L for the test data. With Shapley additive explanations, the personal lifestyle elements important for predicting individual glucose peaks were identified, providing a basis for personalized lifestyle advice. Pending further validation of these digital biomarkers, they show promise in supporting the prevention and management of type 2 diabetes through personalized lifestyle recommendations.

Adherence as a Predictor of Glycemic Control Among Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes: A Retrospective Study Using Real-world Evidence

PurposeMetabolic control among adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is generally poor. Nonadherence is a contributor to this poor glycemic control, leading to adverse outcomes. The findings of studies reporting the association between adherence and glycemic control are conflicting. This study aimed to assess the level of adherence among adolescents with T1DM and its relationship with glycemic control. MethodsThis was a retrospective, cross-sectional study that was conducted at Sidra Medicine, a state-of-the-art tertiary health care facility for women and children in Qatar. Mean blood or interstitial glucose monitoring frequency (BGMF) was used to assess adherence level among adolescents with T1DM, whereas glycemic control was assessed via documented glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). Adolescents who had a mean BGMF of ≥4 checks per day were considered adherent, and those who had an HbA1c level of <7% were considered as having controlled diabetes. Correlational and logistic regression analyses were performed to assess the relationship between adherence and glycemic control, incorporating other covariates into the model. FindingsThe rate of adherence among adolescents with T1DM in Qatar was 40.9%. Adherent adolescents had significantly lower median HbA1c levels compared with nonadherent adolescents (9.0% vs. 9.7%; P = 0.002). A significant negative correlation was found between BGMF and HbA1c level (correlation coefficient rs = −0.325; P < .001). Approximately 97% of nonadherent adolescents compared with 87% of adherent adolescents had suboptimal diabetes control (HbA1c ≥7%) (P = .016). Furthermore, nonadherent adolescents were 78% less likely to have controlled diabetes compared with adherent adolescents (adjusted odds ratio = 0.221; 95% CI, 0.063−0.778; P = 0.019). The combined effect of the determinants of glycemic control among adolescents with T1DM that were included in the multiple regression model was able to explain approximately 9% of the variances in glycemic control (Cox and Snell R2 = 0.092). ImplicationsThe current findings suggest that nonadherence was highly prevalent among adolescents with T1DM and was a significant independent predictor of glycemic control, explaining 9% of the variability. This finding warrants further exploration of other possible predictors of poor glycemic control among the adolescent population. Comprehensive interventions, including educational, technological, and health service delivery aspects, aimed at improving adherence and ultimately optimizing glycemic control are warranted in adolescents with T1DM.

A randomized crossover trial assessing time of day snack consumption and resulting postprandial glycemic response in a real-life setting among healthy adults

ABSTRACT The postprandial glycemic response is an important metabolic health factor, which, from laboratory studies, is known to change from low to high over the course of the day, and from which negative health outcomes have been linked to nightly eating. We applied interstitial continuous glucose monitoring to examine the glycemic response to a standardized carbohydrate-rich snack (198 kcal) across the day in a real-life setting. Twenty-four healthy participants (12 men, 12 women, 27–61 y old) consumed the snack nine times during 6 d in a crossover design, altering the time of consumption between morning, afternoon and evening. The snack was consumed in the participant’s own environment with a preceding fast of at least 2.5 h between their customary main meals and practices. Linear mixed models were used with fixed effect of timing, and participant as random effect, to assess incremental area under the curve, peak value and time-to-peak of the glycemic response. Overall, the highest glycemic excursions were observed in the morning, while a more dampened but prolonged response was observed in the evening. These findings do not concur with previously published laboratory studies. This implies that results obtained under controlled experimental conditions in laboratories cannot be generalized directly to predict chrononutritional effects on the glycemic response in healthy individuals and their daily routines.

Continuous Interstitial Glucose Measurement for Flap Venous Occlusion Monitoring in a Diabetic Model.

Glucose has been used in the monitoring of transplanted flaps. However, few studies have focused on the effect of diabetes on the decrease in flap glucose levels. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the application of continuous interstitial glucose monitoring to detect flap venous occlusion in a diabetic rat model. The flap interstitial glucose level was measured by transcutaneous sensors in the bilateral vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous flaps of each rat. interstitial glucose values in the bilateral flaps were recorded every 5 minutes after the venous occlusion of 1 flap. Forty-one rats were divided into the control group (n = 13), diabetic group (n = 15, established by the intraperitoneal injection of streptozotocin), and insulin-treated diabetic group (n = 13, systemic glucose well controlled by insulin before surgery). Results indicated that flap interstitial glucose decreased to the lowest level in all flaps with venous occlusion. The time from venous occlusionto the lowest interstitial glucose level was significantlylongerinthe diabetic group than the control group (120.8 ± 5.7 minutes versus 56.5 ± 6.7 min-minutes, P < 0.001), but was similar in the insulin-treated diabetic and control groups (56.5 ± 6.7 minutes versus 56.0 ± 6.6 minutes, P = 0.876). The change in interstitial glucose in both the diabetic and insulin-treated diabetic groups began with a plateau period or a slow decline before decreasing for 49.0 ± 6.4 minutes and 24.4 ± 4.3 min-minutes, respectively. in a diabetic rat model, impaired glucose metabolism prolongs the required monitoring time and dulls the reaction of flap interstitial glucose to venous congestion. Insulin restores the prolonged monitoring time, but not the reaction of flap interstitial glucose. Therefore, care is needed during application of the technique in diabetic patients.

Impact of COVID-19 lockdown on glucemic control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus

Background and aimsTo face the rapid spread of SARS-CoV2 coronavirus pandemic, home lockdown in Spain was decreed on 15th March 2020. The main objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of this constraint on glycemic control in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D). Patients and methodsObservational, retrospective study in children and adolescents with T1D users of interstitial glucose monitoring systems. The following information corresponding to the last 2 weeks of lockdown was collected for subsequent comparison with data of 2 weeks prior to quarantine: daily insulin needs, mean interstitial glucose, estimated HbA1c, coefficient of variation (CV), time in range (70–180mg/dl), hypoglycemia (<70 and <54mg/dl) and hyperglycemia (>180 and> 250mg/dl), sensor use and number of blood glucose measurements. Data about meal routines, physical exercise, need for adjustments in therapy, acute complications and lockdown of caregivers were assessed via a survey. Results80 patients were studied (mean age 12.61±3.32 years, mean time of evolution of the disease 5.85±3.92 years), 66.2% treated with an insulin pump, users of following glucose monitoring systems: Guardian 3 (65%), FreeStyle Libre (18.8%) and Dexcom G6 (16.2%). Time in range in the cohort increased significantly during confinement (72.1±10.5 vs 74.8±10.5%; P=0.011) with lower time in hypoglycemia both <70mg/dl (4.6±3.2 vs 3.2±2.7%; P<0.001) and <54mg/dl (1.2±1.6 vs 0.7±1.2%; P<0.001) and hyperglycemia >250mg/dl (4.6±3.9 vs 3.7±3.7%; P=0.038). CV also decreased (35.8±6.3 vs 33.1±6.1%; P<0.001). Patients treated with multiple doses of insulin and poorer baseline glycemic control experienced greatest improvement. Daily insulin requirements remained stable. Regular practice of physical exercise and caregivers’ confinement did not have a significant impact. ConclusionsGlycemic control in children and adolescents with T1D improved during quarantine, particularly in those with worse baseline control.