Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Comparison of Glycemic Metrics Measured Simultaneously by Intermittently Scanned Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Pregnant Women with Type 1 Diabetes

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

DOI

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

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Hypoglycemia-Associated EEG Changes Following Antecedent Hypoglycemia in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. The effect of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant women with diabetes: A randomized controlled trial

    Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debateResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

Background: We aimed to compare clinically important glycemic metrics with focus on mean sensor glucose and time-below-target range (TBR) during nighttime obtained with intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring (isCGM) and real-time CGM (rtCGM) in early pregnancy in women with type 1 diabetes. Materials and Methods: A prospective, observational study including 20 women with type 1 diabetes simultaneously monitored with isCGM (Freestyle Libre; Abbott) and rtCGM (Envision™ Pro; Medtronic) for 7 days in early pregnancy. Time-in-target range (TIR) was defined as 3.5-7.8 mmol/L. Results: Gestational age was median 66 (interquartile range 63-74) days and HbA1c was 48 mmol/mol (43-54). Median difference between isCGM and rtCGM was 0.1 mmol/L (-0.1 to 0.5) (P = 0.50) and -0.1 mmol/L (-0.4 to 0.2) (P = 0.35) for 24 h and during nighttime, respectively. For 24 h, TBR was 3.9% (1.6-7.0) versus 2.0% (0.6-3.7) (P = 0.06) and TIR was 57.2% (50.8-76.5) versus 69.6% (55.4-81.5) (P = 0.001) for isCGM and rtCGM, respectively. During nighttime TBR was 6.5% (0.4-16.7) versus 0% (0.0-0.8) (P = 0.003), TIR was 55.4 (41.1-81.0) versus 68.8 (52.4-80.3) (P = 0.005) and 75% versus 40% of the women had ≥1 glucose reading <3.5 mmol/L. Conclusions: In pregnant women with type 1 diabetes, mean sensor glucose was reported similar when measured by isCGM and rtCGM. However, during nighttime isCGM measured a clinically relevant higher percentage of TBR compared with rtCGM. Thus, the type of CGM device used may influence adjustments of insulin dose based on the concern for nocturnal hypoglycemia. ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03770767).

Original languageEnglish
JournalDiabetes Technology & Therapeutics
Volume23
Issue number10
Pages (from-to)665-672
Number of pages8
ISSN1520-9156
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2021

    Research areas

  • Glycemic metrics, Intermittently scanned CGM, Pregnancy, Real-time CGM, Time-below-target range, Type 1 diabetes

ID: 69734512