Advertisement

Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Clinical Practice: Ambulatory Glucose Profile and the Application of Advanced Glucose Sensing Technologies to Clinical Decision-Making

  • Roger S. Mazze
Chapter

Abstract

Nothing is more fundamental in evidence-based clinical decision-making than understanding the diurnal glucose patterns that characterize dysglycemia. And, nothing is more fundamental to obtaining diurnal glucose patterns than continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The significance of CGM cannot be overstated, whether the treatment decisions are for V˙. Glucose control is unequivocally of significance, and although the evidence remains equivocal as to the precise mechanisms glucose control provides prevent or slow the progression of complications, there is no doubt that its importance remains paramount. The argument can be summed up by Ceriello’s observation after examining diurnal glucose patterns of individuals with normal glucose tolerance: “If the human body spends so much energy to maintain the blood glucose level within such a narrow range, it is because otherwise it would be deleterious” (Ceriello and Ihnat. Diabetic Med 27(8):862–867, 2010). It has been established that individuals with normal glucose metabolism have the lower risk of glucose-related macrovascular, microvascular, as well as maternal and fetal complications when compared to individuals with any degree of dysglycemia.

Keywords

Continuous glucose monitoring Interstitial fluid Flash glucose monitoring Glucose patterns Ambulatory glucose profile Excessive glucose exposure 

References

  1. 1.
    Herranz L, Pallardo L-V, et al. Maternal third trimester hyperglycaemic excursions predict large-for-gestational-age infants in type 1 diabetic pregnancy. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2007;75(1):42–6.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mazze R, Strock E, Borgman S, Wesley D, Stout P, Racchini J. Evaluating the accuracy, reliability, and clinical applicability of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM): is CGM ready for real time? Diabetes Technol Ther. 2009;11(1):11.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hoss U, Budiman E, Liu H, Christiansen H. Continuous glucose monitoring in the subcutaneous tissue over a 14-day sensor wear period. Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013;7(5):1210–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Xing D, Kollman C, Beck R, et al. Optimal sampling intervals to assess long-term glycaemic control using continuous glucose monitoring. Diab Tech Ther. 2011;13:351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mazze R, Strock E, Wesley D, Borgman S, Morgan B, Bergenstal R, Cuddihy R. Characterizing glucose exposure for individuals with normal glucose tolerance using continuous glucose monitoring and ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) analysis. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2008;10(3):149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ceriello A, Ihnat MA. ‘Glycaemic variability’: a new therapeutic challenge in diabetes and the critical care setting. Diabetic Med. 2010;27(8):862–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roger S. Mazze
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.AGP Clinical Academy, Portsmouth Hospitals NHSTPortsmouthUK
  2. 2.Nanjing Medical UniversityNanjingChina
  3. 3.University of Minnesota Medical School and WHO Collaborating Center, International DIabetes Center and Mayo ClinicMinneapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations