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

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Skin Problems Due to Treatment with Technology Are Associated with Increased Disease Burden Among Adults with Type 1 Diabetes

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. DIWHY – Motivations, barriers and retention factors of DIY artificial pancreas users in real world use

    Research output: Contribution to journalConference abstract in journalResearchpeer-review

  1. Newborn body composition after maternal bariatric surgery

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Glycaemic variability and hypoglycaemia are associated with C-peptide levels in insulin-treated type 2 diabetes

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Psychosocial factors and HbA1c in people with insulin-pump treated type 1 diabetes: Protocol for an ongoing systematic literature review

    Research output: Contribution to conferenceConference abstract for conferenceResearchpeer-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
ISSN1520-9156
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 22 Jan 2020

ID: 58035804