糖尿病和非糖尿病危重患者间质血糖持续监测简单准确:与静脉、动脉和毛细血管血糖测量比较。

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Davide Chiumello, Mattia Passeri, Silvia Coppola, Elena Chiodaroli, Simone Carnier, Marialaura Montante, Tommaso Pozzi, Ilaria Goggi, Francesco Bifari, Umberto Mortola, Lucia Centofanti, Franco Folli
{"title":"糖尿病和非糖尿病危重患者间质血糖持续监测简单准确:与静脉、动脉和毛细血管血糖测量比较。","authors":"Davide Chiumello, Mattia Passeri, Silvia Coppola, Elena Chiodaroli, Simone Carnier, Marialaura Montante, Tommaso Pozzi, Ilaria Goggi, Francesco Bifari, Umberto Mortola, Lucia Centofanti, Franco Folli","doi":"10.1007/s00592-025-02531-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To reduce mortality, thigh glycemic control is recommended in critically ill patients due to their extreme glycemic variability. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices allows frequent determination of blood glucose levels; however, conflicting results have been reported from studies assessing their accuracy in critically ill patients. Aim of this study was to assess the repeatability and the analytical and clinical accuracy of FreeStyle Libre 2 (FSL-)CGM.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Prospective single-center observational study enrolling 40 critically ill patients. For four consecutive days, we measured three consecutive interstitial FSL-CGM-derived glucose levels, along with one arterial and venous blood gas analysis and a capillary-derived blood glucose level, obtaining a total of 480 FSL-CGM-derived glucose measurements and 160 measurements from arterial and venous blood gas analysis and from capillary glucose.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean blood glucose levels in the three daily timepoints from FSL-CGM were 130 ± 35, 131 ± 35 and 131 ± 35 mg/dL (p = 0.660). The Bland-Altman analysis comparing arterial BGA- and FSL-CGM-derived blood glucose levels had a bias of 10.3 mg/dL with limits of agreement from - 27.2 to 47.7. The mean absolute relative difference (MARD) between FSL-CGM and arterial blood gas analysis was 12 ± 10%. The Clarke, Parkes and Surveillance error grid analyses comparing arterial BGA- and FSL-CGM-derived blood glucose levels showed a good clinical accuracy. The presence of diabetes did not influence analytical accuracy, while the use of vasopressors was associated with a higher MARD.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FSL-CGM demonstrated reproducibility and reliable analytical and clinical accuracy in critically ill patients, without difference between diabetic and non-diabetic patients, over a period of up to 96 h (4 days).</p>","PeriodicalId":6921,"journal":{"name":"Acta Diabetologica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Continuous interstitial glucose monitoring in diabetic and non-diabetic critically ill patients is simple and accurate: comparison with venous, arterial and capillary glucose measurements.\",\"authors\":\"Davide Chiumello, Mattia Passeri, Silvia Coppola, Elena Chiodaroli, Simone Carnier, Marialaura Montante, Tommaso Pozzi, Ilaria Goggi, Francesco Bifari, Umberto Mortola, Lucia Centofanti, Franco Folli\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00592-025-02531-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To reduce mortality, thigh glycemic control is recommended in critically ill patients due to their extreme glycemic variability. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices allows frequent determination of blood glucose levels; however, conflicting results have been reported from studies assessing their accuracy in critically ill patients. Aim of this study was to assess the repeatability and the analytical and clinical accuracy of FreeStyle Libre 2 (FSL-)CGM.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Prospective single-center observational study enrolling 40 critically ill patients. For four consecutive days, we measured three consecutive interstitial FSL-CGM-derived glucose levels, along with one arterial and venous blood gas analysis and a capillary-derived blood glucose level, obtaining a total of 480 FSL-CGM-derived glucose measurements and 160 measurements from arterial and venous blood gas analysis and from capillary glucose.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean blood glucose levels in the three daily timepoints from FSL-CGM were 130 ± 35, 131 ± 35 and 131 ± 35 mg/dL (p = 0.660). The Bland-Altman analysis comparing arterial BGA- and FSL-CGM-derived blood glucose levels had a bias of 10.3 mg/dL with limits of agreement from - 27.2 to 47.7. The mean absolute relative difference (MARD) between FSL-CGM and arterial blood gas analysis was 12 ± 10%. The Clarke, Parkes and Surveillance error grid analyses comparing arterial BGA- and FSL-CGM-derived blood glucose levels showed a good clinical accuracy. The presence of diabetes did not influence analytical accuracy, while the use of vasopressors was associated with a higher MARD.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>FSL-CGM demonstrated reproducibility and reliable analytical and clinical accuracy in critically ill patients, without difference between diabetic and non-diabetic patients, over a period of up to 96 h (4 days).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6921,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Diabetologica\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Diabetologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00592-025-02531-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Diabetologica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00592-025-02531-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导论:为降低死亡率,危重症患者由于其血糖具有极大的可变性,建议采用大腿血糖控制。连续血糖监测(CGM)设备允许频繁测定血糖水平;然而,评估其在危重患者中的准确性的研究报告了相互矛盾的结果。本研究的目的是评估FreeStyle Libre 2 (FSL-)CGM的重复性、分析和临床准确性。材料和方法:前瞻性单中心观察研究,纳入40例危重患者。在连续四天的时间里,我们测量了三次间质fsl - cgm衍生的葡萄糖水平,以及一次动脉和静脉血气分析和一次毛细血管衍生的血糖水平,总共获得了480次fsl - cgm衍生的葡萄糖测量,以及160次动脉和静脉血气分析和毛细血管葡萄糖测量。结果:FSL-CGM每日3个时间点的平均血糖水平分别为130±35、131±35和131±35 mg/dL (p = 0.660)。Bland-Altman分析比较动脉BGA-和fsl - cgm -衍生血糖水平的偏差为10.3 mg/dL,一致性范围为- 27.2到47.7。FSL-CGM与动脉血气分析的平均绝对相对差(MARD)为12±10%。Clarke, Parkes和Surveillance误差网格分析比较了动脉BGA和fsl - cgm衍生的血糖水平,显示出良好的临床准确性。糖尿病的存在不影响分析的准确性,而血管加压剂的使用与较高的MARD相关。结论:FSL-CGM在长达96小时(4天)的危重患者中具有可重复性和可靠的分析和临床准确性,在糖尿病和非糖尿病患者之间没有差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Continuous interstitial glucose monitoring in diabetic and non-diabetic critically ill patients is simple and accurate: comparison with venous, arterial and capillary glucose measurements.

Introduction: To reduce mortality, thigh glycemic control is recommended in critically ill patients due to their extreme glycemic variability. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices allows frequent determination of blood glucose levels; however, conflicting results have been reported from studies assessing their accuracy in critically ill patients. Aim of this study was to assess the repeatability and the analytical and clinical accuracy of FreeStyle Libre 2 (FSL-)CGM.

Materials and methods: Prospective single-center observational study enrolling 40 critically ill patients. For four consecutive days, we measured three consecutive interstitial FSL-CGM-derived glucose levels, along with one arterial and venous blood gas analysis and a capillary-derived blood glucose level, obtaining a total of 480 FSL-CGM-derived glucose measurements and 160 measurements from arterial and venous blood gas analysis and from capillary glucose.

Results: The mean blood glucose levels in the three daily timepoints from FSL-CGM were 130 ± 35, 131 ± 35 and 131 ± 35 mg/dL (p = 0.660). The Bland-Altman analysis comparing arterial BGA- and FSL-CGM-derived blood glucose levels had a bias of 10.3 mg/dL with limits of agreement from - 27.2 to 47.7. The mean absolute relative difference (MARD) between FSL-CGM and arterial blood gas analysis was 12 ± 10%. The Clarke, Parkes and Surveillance error grid analyses comparing arterial BGA- and FSL-CGM-derived blood glucose levels showed a good clinical accuracy. The presence of diabetes did not influence analytical accuracy, while the use of vasopressors was associated with a higher MARD.

Conclusions: FSL-CGM demonstrated reproducibility and reliable analytical and clinical accuracy in critically ill patients, without difference between diabetic and non-diabetic patients, over a period of up to 96 h (4 days).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Diabetologica
Acta Diabetologica 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.60%
发文量
180
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Acta Diabetologica is a journal that publishes reports of experimental and clinical research on diabetes mellitus and related metabolic diseases. Original contributions on biochemical, physiological, pathophysiological and clinical aspects of research on diabetes and metabolic diseases are welcome. Reports are published in the form of original articles, short communications and letters to the editor. Invited reviews and editorials are also published. A Methodology forum, which publishes contributions on methodological aspects of diabetes in vivo and in vitro, is also available. The Editor-in-chief will be pleased to consider articles describing new techniques (e.g., new transplantation methods, metabolic models), of innovative importance in the field of diabetes/metabolism. Finally, workshop reports are also welcome in Acta Diabetologica.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信