Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Continuous Glucose Monitoring: Current Use and Future Directions

  • Treatment of Type 1 Diabetes (JR Unger, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Diabetes Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is an emerging technology that provides a continuous measure of interstitial glucose levels. In addition to providing a more complete pattern of glucose excursions, CGMs utilize real-time alarms for thresholds and predictions of hypo- and hyperglycemia, as well as rate of change alarms for rapid glycemic excursions. CGM users have been able to improve glycemic control without increasing their risk of hypoglycemia. Sensor accuracy, reliability, and wearability are important challenges to CGM success and are critical to the development of an artificial pancreas (or closed-loop system).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Davis EA, Keating B, Byrne GC, et al. Hypoglycemia: incidence and clinical predictors in a large population-based sample of children and adolescents with IDDM. Diabetes Care. 1997;20:22–5.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mastrototaro JJ. The MiniMed continuous glucose monitoring system. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2000;2 Suppl 1:S13–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Feldman B, Brazg R, Schwartz S, et al. A continuous glucose sensor based on wired enzyme technology —results from a 3-day trial in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2003;5:769–79.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Garg S, Zisser H, Schwartz S, et al. Improvement in glycemic excursions with a transcutaneous, real-time continuous glucose sensor: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:44–50.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hirsch IB, Abelseth J, Bode BW, et al. Sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy: results of the first randomized treat-to-target study. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2008;10:377–83.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Tamborlane WV, Beck RW, Bode BW, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring and intensive treatment of type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:1464–76.

    Google Scholar 

  7. • Tamborlane W, Beck R, Laffel L. Continuous glucose monitoring and type 1 Diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1901–192. This landmark study of CGM demonstrated that almost daily use of CGM is required to achieve significant improvements in A1c levels without increasing the risk of hypoglcyemia, and adults were more consistent with CGM use compared with children and adolescents.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Deiss D, Bolinder J, Riveline JP, et al. Improved glycemic control in poorly controlled patients with type 1 diabetes using real-time continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:2730–2.

    Google Scholar 

  9. O'Connell MA, Donath S, O'Neal DN, et al. Glycaemic impact of patient-led use of sensor-guided pump therapy in type 1 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia. 2009;52:1250–7.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Chase HP, Beck RW, Xing D, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring in youth with type 1 diabetes: 12-month follow-up of the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation continuous glucose monitoring randomized trial. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2010;12:507–15.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. • Bergenstal RM, Tamborlane WV, Ahmann A, et al. Effectiveness of sensor-augmented insulin-pump therapy in type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:311–20. This is the largest randomized trial of CGM use and demonstrated that sensor augmented pump therapy achieved significant improvements in A1c levels along with a very low incidence of severe hypoglycemic events in children, adolescents, and adults.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Buckingham B, Wilson DM, Lecher T, et al. Duration of nocturnal hypoglycemia prior to seizures. Diabetes Care. 2008;31:2110–2.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Cobry E, McFann K, Messer L, et al. Timing of meal insulin boluses to achieve optimal postprandial glycemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2010;12:173–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Smith CB, Choudhary P, Pernet A, et al. Hypoglycemia unawareness is associated with reduced adherence to therapeutic decisions in patients with type 1 diabetes: evidence from a clinical audit. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:1196–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tsalikian E, Tamborlane W, Xing D, et al. Blunted counterregulatory hormone responses to hypoglycemia in young children and adolescents with well-controlled type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:1954–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Jones TW, Porter P, Sherwin RS, et al. Decreased epinephrine responses to hypoglycemia during sleep. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:1657–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Ly TT, Hewitt J, Davey R, et al. Improving epinephrine responses in hypoglycemia unawareness with real-time continuous glucose monitoring in adolescents with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2011;34:50–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mesotten D, Van den Berghe G. Clinical potential of insulin therapy in critically ill patients. Drugs. 2003;63:625–36.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Finfer S, Chittock DR, Su S, et al. Intensive vs conventional glucose control in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1283–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Holzinger U, Warszawska J, Kitzberger R, et al. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring in critically ill patients: a prospective randomized trial. Diabetes Care. 2010;33:467–72.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Agus MS, Steil GM, Wypij D, et al. Tight glycemic control vs standard care after pediatric cardiac surgery. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1208–19.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Harris DL, Battin MR, Weston PJ, Harding J. Continuous glucose monitoring in newborn babies at risk of hypoglycemia. J Pediatr. 2010;157:198–202. e1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hay Jr WW, Rozance PJ. Continuous glucose monitoring for diagnosis and treatment of neonatal hypoglycemia. J Pediatr. 2010;157:180–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Schiaffini R, Brufani C, Russo B, et al. Abnormal glucose tolerance in children with cystic fibrosis: the predictive role of continuous glucose monitoring system. Eur J Endocrinol. 2010;162:705–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Hershkovitz E, Rachmel A, Ben-Zaken H, Phillip M. Continuous glucose monitoring in children with glycogen storage disease type I. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2001;24:863–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. White FJ, Jones SA. The use of continuous glucose monitoring in the practical management of glycogen storage disorders. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2011;34:631–42.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Steil GM, Rebrin K, Mastrototaro J, et al. Determination of plasma glucose during rapid glucose excursions with a subcutaneous glucose sensor. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2003;5:27–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Cengiz E, Sherr JL, Weinzimer SA, Tamborlane WV. New-generation diabetes management: glucose sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2011;8:449–58.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Rebrin K, Sheppard Jr NF, Steil GM. Use of subcutaneous interstitial fluid glucose to estimate blood glucose: revisiting delay and sensor offset. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2010;4:1087–98.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Voskanyan G, Keenan B, Mastrototaro J, Steil G. Putative delays in interstitial fluid (ISF) glucose kinetics can be attributed to the glucose sensing systems used to measure them rather than the delay in ISF glucose itself. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2007;1:639–44.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Keenan DB, Mastrototaro JJ, Zisser H, et al. Accuracy of the Enlite 6-day glucose sensor with guardian and Veo calibration algorithms. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2012;14:225–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Christiansen M, Bailey T, Watkins E. A new-generation continuous glucose monitoring system: improved accuracy and reliability compared with a previous-generation system. Diabetes Technol. Ther. 2013;15:1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Gifford R, Batchelor MM, Lee Y, et al. Mediation of in vivo glucose sensor inflammatory response via nitric oxide release. J Biomed Mater Res A. 2005;75:755–66.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Klueh U, Kaur M, Qiao Y, Kreutzer D. Critical role of tissue mast cells in controlling long-term glucose sensor function in vivo. Biomaterials. 2010;31:4540–51.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Klueh U, Liu Z, Feldman B, et al. Metabolic biofouling of glucose sensors in vivo: role of tissue microhemorrhages. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011;5:583–95.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Klueh U, Liu Z, Feldman B, Kreutzer D. Importance of interleukin-1 and interleukin-1 receptor antagonist in short-term glucose sensor function in vivo. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2010;4:1073–86.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Helton KL, Ratner BD, Wisniewski NA. Biomechanics of the sensor-tissue interface-effects of motion, pressure, and design on sensor performance and foreign body response-part II: examples and application. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011;5:647–56.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Gilligan BJ, Shults MC, Rhodes RK, Updike SJ. Evaluation of a subcutaneous glucose sensor out to 3 months in a dog model. Diabetes Care. 1994;17:882–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Buckingham BA, Kollman C, Beck R, et al. Evaluation of factors affecting CGMS calibration. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2006;8:318–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kamath A, Mahalingam A, Brauker J. Analysis of time lags and other sources of error of the DexCom SEVEN continuous glucose monitor. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2009;11:689–95.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Mazze RS, Strock P, Borgman S, et al. Evaluating the accuracy, reliability, and clinical applicability of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM): is CGM ready for real-time? Diabetes Technol Ther. 2009;11:11–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Kordonouri O, Pankowska E, Kami B, et al. Sensor-augmented pump therapy from the diagnosis of childhood type 1 diabetes: results of the Paediatric Onset Study (ONSET) after 12 months of treatment. Diabetologia. 2010;53:2487–95.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Ramchandani N, Arya S, Ten S, Bhandari S, et al. Real-life utilization of real-time continuous glucose monitoring: the complete picture. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011;5:860–70.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Vaddiraju S, Burgess DJ, Tomazos I, et al. Technologies for continuous glucose monitoring: current problems and future promises. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2010;4:1540–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Gough DA, Kurnosa LS, Routh TL, et al. Function of an implanted tissue glucose sensor for more than 1 year in animals. Sci Transl Med. 2010;2:42–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Cobelli C, Renard E, Kovatchev BP, et al. Pilot studies of wearable outpatient artificial pancreas in type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2012;35:e65–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Wilinska ME, Budiman HS, Taub MB, et al. Overnight closed-loop insulin delivery with model predictive control: assessment of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia risk using simulation studies. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2009;3:1109–20.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Castle JR, Pitts A, Hanavan K, et al. The accuracy benefit of multiple amperometric glucose sensors in people with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2012;35:706–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Compliance with Ethics Guidelines

Conflict of Interest

Daniel DeSalvo declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Bruce Buckingham has served on medical advisory boards for Medtronic, Animas, Mendingo, Debiotech, Glysense, Sanofi-Aventis, BD; has received grant support from Medtronic Minimed, which provided sensors and pumps at a research discount for JDRF and NIH sponsored trials and for PI-initiated studies; has received travel/accommodations expenses covered or reimbursed from Sanofi-Aventis for advisory board meetings.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes, Stanford Medical Center, G-313, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA

    Daniel DeSalvo & Bruce Buckingham

Authors
  1. Daniel DeSalvo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bruce Buckingham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bruce Buckingham.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

DeSalvo, D., Buckingham, B. Continuous Glucose Monitoring: Current Use and Future Directions. Curr Diab Rep 13, 657–662 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-013-0398-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-013-0398-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation