Page 144 - Glucose Monitoring Devices
P. 144

145
                                                                Available CGM systems



                  creating significant inaccuracies when comparing data between trials. Sensor lag
                  describes the delay in glucose diffusion across the capillary bed, into the interstitial
                  space, and finally being registered by the CGM sensor. Technological advances
                  have seen sensor lag reduce to a few minutes from the 15 min reported in early
                  CGM systems. Nonetheless, the cumulative effect of this delay can result in sensor
                  measurements drifting further away from corresponding capillary blood glucose
                  values. Systems susceptible to sensor drift are required to undergo twice-daily
                  CGM calibration during glycemic steady states to overcome the significant inaccu-
                  racy resulting from sensor drift. Significant improvements in CGMs accuracy has
                  seen the UK Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency update their guidelines to
                  permit its use among car and motorcycle drivers on insulin therapy. However,
                  individuals are obligated to measure their capillary glucose if they experience
                  symptoms of hypoglycaemia or blood glucose levels are 4mmol/L or below. Alarm
                  fatigue is well described in CGM where hypo- and hyperglycemia alarm notifica-
                  tions are intrinsic components in establishing clinical efficacy and in extreme cases
                  cannot be disabled. Shivers et al. addressed the artificially higher thresholds set for
                  low glucose alarms to increase detection sensitivity, however inversely reducing
                  specificity and subjecting users to more false-positive alarms [67]. This, in turn,
                  increases alarm fatigue, drives users to ignore alarms, and ultimately abandon
                  CGM [67]. The signal loss to receiver/smartphone and false measurements due
                  to physical sensor compression are additional hardware issues with significant
                  implications when responsible for automated insulin delivery within a closed-
                  loop AP system. Lastly, unless financially reimbursed by healthcare providers, per-
                  manent use of CGM is an expensive venture and economically out of reach for
                  most individuals.



                  Available CGM systems
                  Positive clinical trial outcomes have contributed to a rise in the popularity and num-
                  ber of available CGM systems. Listed below are a summary of randomised
                  controlled CGM trials and the currently available CGM systems in the United
                  Kingdom (Tables 7.1 and 7.2).


                  Dexcom
                  The Dexcom G6 is a standalone CGM system with superior accuracy (MARD 9%)
                  compared to its competitors. The sensor iseasilyinsertedand requires a2hwarm-
                  up period before glucose levels are uploaded for user access. Once active, glucose
                  measurements are transmitted via Bluetooth to either a proprietary Dexcom
                  receiver, the Dexcom smartphone application, or a sensor-augmented insulin
                  pump (e.g., Tandem T-slim). The G6 comes equipped with a simple to use
                  one-touch sensor applicator, boasts an extended sensor life span of 10 days, and
                  is not affected by acetaminophen. Of greatest significance to users is the
   139   140   141   142   143   144   145   146   147   148   149