HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Jeha, G. S. Articles by Haymond, M. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Jeha, G. S. Articles by Haymond, M. W. Social Bookmarking                What's this?

Continuous Glucose Monitoring and the Reality of Metabolic Control in Preschool Children With Type 1 Diabetes

¹ Section of Pediatric Endocrinology and Metabolism, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas
² Section of Pediatric Endocrinology and Metabolism, Texas Children’s Hospital, Houston, Texas

Address correspondence and reprint requests to George Jeha, MD, Texas Children’s Hospital, Clinical Care Center, Suite 1020, 6621 Fannin St., CC 1020.05, Houston, TX 77030. E-mail: gsjeha{at}texaschildrenshospital.org

OBJECTIVE—To determine using the MiniMed continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) 1) whether twice-daily insulin injection therapy achieves adequate control in preschool children with type 1 diabetes and 2) whether the CGMS is more informative than self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) regarding glucose control and well tolerated by preschool children and their families.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—Ten children <6 years of age with type 1 diabetes were monitored twice using the CGMS. The distribution of glucose values was analyzed, particularly the frequency, duration, and distribution of hypoglycemia. We analyzed the accuracy of the CGMS in detecting hypoglycemia as well as the clinical relevance of the difference between CGMS and SMBG values.

RESULTS—Although hypoglycemia was more frequent during the night (0.8 nighttime episodes · subject^–1 · 24 h^–1 vs. 0.3 daytime episodes · subject^–1 · 24 h^–1), the difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.07). However, nighttime episodes lasted longer than daytime episodes (1.2 vs. 0.2 h · subject^–1 · 24 h^–1, P = 0.006). Hypoglycemia accounted for 7% and normoglycemia for 24%, while hyperglycemia occurred 64% of the time, with postprandial hyperglycemia being an almost universal feature (94 ± 7% of all postmeal values). The CGMS correlated well with SMBG without significant clinical discrepancy. The CGMS sensitivity to detect hypoglycemia was 70% with a specificity of 99%; however, the CGMS detected twice as many total episodes as SMBG (82 vs. 40).

CONCLUSIONS—Twice-daily insulin injection rarely achieves control in preschool children with type 1 diabetes. The CGMS is well tolerated by patients and has the advantage of revealing daily glucose trends missed by SMBG.

Abbreviations: CGMS, continuous glucose monitoring system • SMBG, self-monitoring of blood glucose

CiteULike    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				V. Valentine Continuous Glucose Monitoring Has Left the Station: Are You Onboard? The Diabetes Educator, September 1, 2005; 31(5): 649 - 662. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Wiesli, C. Schmid, O. Kerwer, C. Nigg-Koch, R. Klaghofer, B. Seifert, G. A. Spinas, and K. Schwegler Acute Psychological Stress Affects Glucose Concentrations in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Following Food Intake but not in the Fasting State Diabetes Care, August 1, 2005; 28(8): 1910 - 1915. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. C. Klonoff Continuous Glucose Monitoring: Roadmap for 21st century diabetes therapy Diabetes Care, May 1, 2005; 28(5): 1231 - 1239. [Full Text] [PDF]