Evaluating the precision and reliability of real-time continuous glucose monitoring systems in ambulatory settings: a systematic review.

IF 3.9 3区 医学 Q2 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Therapeutic Advances in Endocrinology and Metabolism Pub Date : 2024-12-11 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/20420188241304459
Valentina Dávila-Ruales, Laura F Gilón, Ana M Gómez, Oscar M Muñoz, María N Serrano, Diana C Henao
{"title":"Evaluating the precision and reliability of real-time continuous glucose monitoring systems in ambulatory settings: a systematic review.","authors":"Valentina Dávila-Ruales, Laura F Gilón, Ana M Gómez, Oscar M Muñoz, María N Serrano, Diana C Henao","doi":"10.1177/20420188241304459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with minimally invasive devices plays a key role in the assessment of daily diabetes management by detecting and alerting to potentially dangerous trends in glucose levels, improving quality of life, and treatment adherence. However, there is still uncertainty as to whether CGMs are accurate enough to replace self-monitoring of blood glucose, especially in detecting episodes of hypoglycemia.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Evaluate clinical, numerical accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the CGM devices commercially available when compared to the reference standard of arterial or venous blood glucose.</p><p><strong>Data sources and methods: </strong>We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and LILACS databases. The quality was assessed with the Quality Assessment Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Clinical and numerical accuracy data were extracted. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated using Review Manager software. Heterogeneity was assessed by visual examination of forest plot and summary receiver operating characteristic curves.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-two studies with a total of 2294 patients were included. The average mean absolute relative difference for overall diagnostic accuracy was 9.4%. None of the devices evaluated with ISO 15197:2013 criteria achieved values ⩾95% of measurements in the stipulated ranges in hypoglycemia (±15 mg/dL), but two devices did achieve it in hyperglycemia (±15%; Dexcom G6 and G7). Most of the devices evaluated with consensus error grids reached values above 99% in zones A and B only in overall accuracy and hyperglycemia. For hypoglycemia, the average sensitivity was 85.7% and specificity 95.33%, and for hyperglycemia was 97.45% and 96% respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Currently available CGM devices have adequate accuracy for euglycemia and hyperglycemia; however, it is still inadequate for hypoglycemia, although it has improved over time.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Prospero registration ID CRD42023399767.</p>","PeriodicalId":22998,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic Advances in Endocrinology and Metabolism","volume":"15 ","pages":"20420188241304459"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11635893/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic Advances in Endocrinology and Metabolism","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20420188241304459","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with minimally invasive devices plays a key role in the assessment of daily diabetes management by detecting and alerting to potentially dangerous trends in glucose levels, improving quality of life, and treatment adherence. However, there is still uncertainty as to whether CGMs are accurate enough to replace self-monitoring of blood glucose, especially in detecting episodes of hypoglycemia.

Objectives: Evaluate clinical, numerical accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the CGM devices commercially available when compared to the reference standard of arterial or venous blood glucose.

Data sources and methods: We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and LILACS databases. The quality was assessed with the Quality Assessment Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. Clinical and numerical accuracy data were extracted. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated using Review Manager software. Heterogeneity was assessed by visual examination of forest plot and summary receiver operating characteristic curves.

Results: Twenty-two studies with a total of 2294 patients were included. The average mean absolute relative difference for overall diagnostic accuracy was 9.4%. None of the devices evaluated with ISO 15197:2013 criteria achieved values ⩾95% of measurements in the stipulated ranges in hypoglycemia (±15 mg/dL), but two devices did achieve it in hyperglycemia (±15%; Dexcom G6 and G7). Most of the devices evaluated with consensus error grids reached values above 99% in zones A and B only in overall accuracy and hyperglycemia. For hypoglycemia, the average sensitivity was 85.7% and specificity 95.33%, and for hyperglycemia was 97.45% and 96% respectively.

Conclusion: Currently available CGM devices have adequate accuracy for euglycemia and hyperglycemia; however, it is still inadequate for hypoglycemia, although it has improved over time.

Trial registration: Prospero registration ID CRD42023399767.

评估实时连续血糖监测系统在门诊设置的精度和可靠性:系统综述。
背景:使用微创设备的连续血糖监测(CGM)通过检测和预警血糖水平的潜在危险趋势,改善生活质量和治疗依从性,在评估日常糖尿病管理中起着关键作用。然而,对于cgm是否足够精确以取代自我血糖监测,特别是在检测低血糖发作时,仍然存在不确定性。目的:与参考标准的动脉或静脉血葡萄糖相比,评估市售CGM装置的临床、数值准确性、敏感性和特异性。数据来源和方法:检索Cochrane Library、PubMed、EMBASE和LILACS数据库。使用质量评估诊断准确性研究(QUADAS-2)工具评估质量。提取临床和数值精度数据。使用Review Manager软件计算敏感性和特异性。通过森林图和综合受试者工作特征曲线的目视检查来评估异质性。结果:纳入22项研究,共2294例患者。总体诊断准确率的平均绝对相对差为9.4%。使用ISO 15197:2013标准评估的设备中,没有一个在规定的低血糖(±15 mg/dL)范围内达到小于或等于95%的测量值,但是两个设备在高血糖(±15%;Dexcom G6和G7)。大多数用一致误差网格评估的设备仅在总体精度和高血糖中在A区和B区达到99%以上的值。对低血糖的平均敏感性为85.7%,特异性为95.33%,对高血糖的平均敏感性为97.45%,特异性为96%。结论:目前可用的CGM装置对血糖正常和高血糖有足够的准确性;然而,它仍然不足以治疗低血糖,尽管随着时间的推移它已经有所改善。试验注册:普洛斯彼罗注册号CRD42023399767。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Therapeutic Advances in Endocrinology and Metabolism
Therapeutic Advances in Endocrinology and Metabolism Medicine-Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
2.60%
发文量
42
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Therapeutic Advances in Endocrinology and Metabolism delivers the highest quality peer-reviewed articles, reviews, and scholarly comment on pioneering efforts and innovative studies across all areas of endocrinology and metabolism.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信