Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
The Capital Region of Denmark - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Glucose Sensor Accuracy After Subcutaneous Glucagon Injections Near to Sensor Site

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

DOI

  1. Efficacy of Bolus Calculation and Advanced Carbohydrate Counting in Type 2 Diabetes: A randomized clinical trial

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Cost of Treating Skin Problems in Patients with Diabetes who Use Insulin Pumps and/or Glucose Sensors

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Insulin pump settings during breastfeeding in women with type 1 diabetes

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Comparison of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Accuracy Between Abdominal and Upper Arm Insertion Sites

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

Background: Integrated hormone delivery and glucose sensing is warranted, but system performance could be challenged by glucose sensor susceptibility to pharmacological interferences. The aim of this study was to compare sensor accuracy (Medtronic Enlite 2 ®) after subcutaneous (s.c.) administration of low-dose glucagon near to versus remote from sensor site. Methods: Twelve adults with insulin-pump-treated type 1 diabetes wore two continuous glucose monitors (CGM glucagon and CGM control) placed on each side of the abdomen before, during, and after two overnight 14-h in-clinic visits. During each visit, a s.c. 100 μg glucagon injection was administered 2 cm next to the CGM glucagon followed by another injection of 100 μg glucagon 2 h later at the same site. CGM performance was evaluated using 4-h in-clinic Yellow Spring Instrument (YSI) measurements and 3-day self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in free-living conditions. Results: Using YSI as comparator, no difference in the median absolute relative difference (MARD) for CGM glucagon (15.7%) and CGM control (13.4%) was found ( P  = 0.195). Similarly, no difference in MARD was found between CGM glucagon (11.0%) and CGM control (6.2%) using SMBG as comparator ( P  = 0.148). Values in zone A + B of Clarke error grid analysis did not differ between CGM glucagon and CGM control using YSI (93.9% vs. 91.1%, P  = 0.250) and SMBG (97.3% vs. 95.0%, P  = 0.375) as reference measurement. The precision absolute relative deviation between sensors was 13.7%. Conclusions: Sensor accuracy was not significantly affected by administration of s.c. glucagon near to sensor site.

Original languageEnglish
JournalDiabetes Technology & Therapeutics
Volume22
Issue number2
Pages (from-to)131-135
Number of pages5
ISSN1520-9156
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Jan 2020

    Research areas

  • Accuracy, Closed-loop, Continuous glucose monitoring, Dual-hormone, Glucagon, Glucose sensor

ID: 58035804