4.4 Article

Comparison between a flash glucose monitoring system and a portable blood glucose meter for monitoring dogs with diabetes mellitus

期刊

JOURNAL OF VETERINARY INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 34, 期 6, 页码 2296-2305

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jvim.15930

关键词

canine; diabetes mellitus; FreeStyle Libre; interstitial glucose

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Flash glucose monitoring system (FGMS; FreeStyle Libre) was recently validated for use in diabetic dogs (DD). It is not known if this system is clinically useful in monitoring DD. Objective To compare the clinical utility of FGMS against blood glucose curves (BGCs) obtained with a portable blood glucose meter (PBGM) in monitoring DD. Animals Twenty dogs with diabetes mellitus. Methods Prospective study. Dogs with diabetes mellitus on insulin treatment for at least 1 month were included. Comparisons of insulin dose recommendations based on the in-hospital GCs acquired using FGMS and a PBGM, consecutive-day interstitial GCs (IGCs) acquired at home using the FGMS, and consecutive-day, home vs hospital IGCs acquired using the FGMS were made using concordance analysis. Results There was good concordance between insulin dose recommendations based on FGMS and PBGM generated GCs and IGCs obtained in the 2 different environments on 2 consecutive days, but almost absent concordance between IGCs obtained on 2 consecutive days at home. Glucose nadirs were detected in 34/43 (79%) of Ambulatory Glucose Profile (AGP) reports of the FGMS. In comparison, concordant glucose nadirs were identified in 14/34 (41%) BGCs using PBGM. The individual FGMS scans and PBGM identified 60% and 9% of low IG/hypoglycemic episodes, respectively. Conclusions and Clinical Importance Insulin dose adjustments based on BGCs can be suboptimal. The FGMS allows a more accurate identification of the glucose nadirs and hypoglycemic episodes compared to the use of a PBGM and assessment of day-to-day variations in glycemic control.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据