Patients’ evaluation of nocturnal hypoglycaemia with GlucoDay continuous glucose monitoring in paediatric patients
A study was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of GlucoDay (A. Menarini Diagnostics) during 48 h of continuous glucose monitoring (CGMS) in type 1 diabetic adolescents and use this novel approach to assess otherwise ignored nocturnal hypoglycaemias, in relationship to intermediate-acting insulin administration timing. Twenty type 1 diabetic adolescents with poor metabolic control were selected from our out-patient department. Equal doses of intermediate insulin were administered at 19:00 and at 22:00 of the first and second night of the study, respectively. Correlation coefficient between GlucoDay and standard glucometer was 0.94; 98.3% of data fall in the A + B area of Error Grid Analysis and 1.7% in the D area. The mean error was 13.9% overall and 16.4% with blood glucose values (BGV) <75 mg/dl. The accuracy, ±15 mg/dl, was 82% for BGV <75 mg/dl and 74% for BGV >75 mg/dl. The CGMS discovered nocturnal hypoglycaemia (NH) in 12/18 patients, but no severe hypoglycaemia. During the first night, 8 asymptomatic NH episodes were found with BGV <60 mg/dl and 12 with BGV <80. During the second night, 4 asymptomatic NH episodes with BGV <60 mg/dl and 5 with BGV <80 were found. Furthermore, during the second night, the mean duration of BGV <126 mg/dl was lower than in the first night. GlucoDay is a reliable device for CGMS in paediatric patients and able to determine asymptomatic NH. Bedtime insulin injections provided safer glycaemic profiles and a lower percentage of hypoglycaemic events, representing a safer insulin administration scheme.
KeywordsCGMS Hypoglycaemia Nocturnal hypoglycaemia Insulin treatment
- 2.Writing Team for the Diabetes Control, Complication Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions, Complication Research Group (2003) Sustained effect of intensive treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus on development and progression of diabetic nephropathy: the Epidemiology of diabetes interventions and complictions (EDIC) study. JAMA 290(16):2159–2167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Maran A, Crepaldi C, Tiengo A, Grassi G, Vitali E, Pagano G, Bistoni S, Calabrese G, Santeusanio F, Leonetti F, Ribaudo M, Di Mario U, Annuzzi G, Genovese S, Riccardi G, Previti M, Cucinotta D, Giorgino F, Bellomo A, Giorgino R, Poscia A, Varalli M (2002) Continuous subcutaneous glucose monitoring in diabetic patients. Diabetes Care 25:347–352CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 20.Chase HP, Dixon B, Pearson J, Fiallo-Scharer R, Walravens P, Klingensmith G, Rewers M, Garg SK (2003) Reduced hypoglycemic episodes, improved glycaemic control in children with type 1 diabetes using insulin glargine, neutral protamine Hagerdorn insulin. J Pediatr 143(6):704–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Weitrob N, Schechter A, Benzaquen H, Shalitin S, Lilos P, Galatzer A, Phillip M (2004) Glycaemic patterns detected by continuous glucose sensing in children, adolescent with type 1 diabetes mellitus treated by multiple daily injection vs continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 158(7):677–684CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Mauras N, Beck RW, Ruedy Kj, Kollman C, Tamborlane WN, Chase HP, Buckingham BA, Tsalikian E, Weinzimer S, Booyh AD, Xing D, Diabetets Research in Children Network (direcNet) accuracy study (2004) Lack of accuracy of continuous glucose sensors in healthy, nondiabetic children: results of the Diabetes Research in Children Network (Direcnet) accuracy study. J Pediatr 144(6):770–775CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar