Skip to main content
Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology logoLink to Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology
. 2015 Jun 15;9(4):725–738. doi: 10.1177/1932296815587938

Vascular Glucose Sensor Symposium

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems (CGMS) for Hospitalized and Ambulatory Patients at Risk for Hyperglycemia, Hypoglycemia, and Glycemic Variability

Jeffrey I Joseph 1,, Marc C Torjman 1, Paul J Strasma 2
PMCID: PMC4525658  PMID: 26078254

Abstract

Hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and glycemic variability have been associated with increased morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and cost in a variety of critical care and non–critical care patient populations in the hospital. The results from prospective randomized clinical trials designed to determine the risks and benefits of intensive insulin therapy and tight glycemic control have been confusing; and at times conflicting. The limitations of point-of-care blood glucose (BG) monitoring in the hospital highlight the great clinical need for an automated real-time continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) that can accurately measure the concentration of glucose every few minutes. Automation and standardization of the glucose measurement process have the potential to significantly improve BG control, clinical outcome, safety and cost.

Keywords: vascular glucose sensor, continuous glucose monitoring system, continuous glucose monitor, artificial pancreas, hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, glycemic variability


This introduction to the Vascular Glucose Sensor Symposium describes the clinical and technical advantages/disadvantages of CGMS developed for hospitalized patients and ambulatory patients with diabetes. Early research has focused on the demonstration of safety and point accuracy in a variety of patient populations and environments. Current research is attempting to demonstrate whether the CGMS trend data can be used by the clinician and patient to improve overall BG control and eliminate the risk for hypoglycemia.

Although clinicians strongly believe CGMS has great potential to improve safety and clinical outcome, additional clinical trials are required before hospital administrators and insurance companies are willing to pay for a new technology to replace current methods of BG monitoring and control. A long-term goal of this research is an automated closed-loop artificial pancreas system capable of safely controlling the concentration of BG in a wide variety of hospital ized patients.

CGMSs are also being developed for long-term implantation within the subcutaneous tissue and bloodstream. A long-term implantable CGMS could be coupled with an external or implantable insulin pump to automatically control the concentration of BG in ambulatory patients with diabetes.

Clinical Need for Glucose Monitoring and Control in the Hospital

Hospitalized patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) commonly develop mild to moderate hyperglycemia (prevalence 90% in 1 survey) due to rapid enteral/parenteral infusions of dextrose plus beta cell dysfunction and mismatched insulin therapy.1 An estimated 18-38% of DM patients have persistent hyperglycemia while in the hospital, defined as 3 consecutive days with a BG level >200 mg/dl.1,2 In addition, many diabetic and nondiabetic patients develop “stress hyperglycemia” following major surgery or acute medical illness due to increased gluconeogenesis and insulin resistance.3 Stress hyperglycemia may occur secondary to increased levels of corticosteroids, catecholamines, cytokines, growth hormone, general anesthetics, and/or hypothermia.1-3

Hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and glycemic variability have been independently associated with increased morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and cost in a variety of critical care and non–critical care patient populations in the hospital.4-12 Observational trials have revealed a moderate to strong association between hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and glycemic variability with an increased risk for infection, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, acute kidney injury, neuropathy, and worse clinical outcome after myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, burns, and trauma.13-28

The results from prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) designed to determine the risks and benefits of intensive insulin therapy and tight glycemic control have been confusing, and at times conflicting.29-31 Some prospective RCTs demonstrated a significant decrease in morbidity and mortality when the BG concentration was targeted to the near-normal BG range with IV insulin; while other RCTs in medical and surgical ICU patients did not show a clinical benefit from IV insulin therapy and tight glycemic control.29-37

Results from the RCT highlighted the limitations of current clinical methods of glucose monitoring and insulin delivery. All of the RCTs were complicated by a high incidence of mild, moderate and severe hypoglycemia; and a low percentage of time spent in the target range.29-37 Several of the major endocrinology and critical care societies subsequently changed their guidelines to a more conservative target BG range (140-180 mg/dl) to minimize the risk for hypoglycemia.38-43

Current Methods for Monitoring BG in the Hospital

Safe and effective insulin therapy in the hospital requires accurate BG measurements every 2 to 4 hours when a patient’s physiology and BG concentration are stable and every 30 to 60 minutes when the BG is changing rapidly, especially in the hypoglycemia range.43-49 Current methods of BG monitoring are labor intensive and prone to preanalytical and analytical error. Hourly BG monitoring for 1 patient requires more than 2 hours of a nurse’s time per day to sample blood, measure the concentration of BG, and document the result in the medical record.50 Intensive insulin therapy and tight glycemic control are therefore limited to a small number of patients in the hospital that are managed in the OR and ICU.49

The most accurate and precise BG measurements in the hospital are obtained using blood sampled from a radial artery catheter that is assayed with a central laboratory glucose analyzer or an ICU blood gas analyzer.51-54 Whole blood samples obtained from a central venous catheter or a peripheral venous catheter may be contaminated or diluted by adjacent infusions.55 The glucose concentration in peripheral arterial blood is typically 4 to 8 mg/dl higher than peripheral venous blood.51-53 The BG concentration in the vena cava can be variable due to hepatic/renal glucose production, absorption of food from the intestines, analytical error due to variable oxygen and hematocrit levels, and contamination/dilution from adjacent infusions.55-62

The most timely but least accurate BG measurements are obtained using a fingerstick capillary blood sample and a point-of-care glucose meter/test strip. Fingerstick capillary blood may produce an erroneous BG measurement due to poor tissue perfusion, dilution with edema fluid, or contamination from glucose on the skin surface.51-53,56-58,60-62 Accuracy of the point-of-care meters can be adversely affected by anemia, polycythemia, hypoxemia, acidosis, drugs (acetaminophen, dopamine, mannitol, and maltose), low sample volume, and human transcription error.43,51-52,60-61,63

In conclusion, hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and glycemic variability commonly occur in hospitalized patients with diabetes and stress hyperglycemia despite significant nursing time and hospital resources devoted to BG control.1,2,29,30

Additional prospective randomized trials are required in specific patient populations to determine whether intensive insulin therapy and tight BG control lead to improved clinical outcomes. Future RCTs will use real-time CGMS with a validated insulin dosing algorithm to maintain a hospitalized patient’s BG level in the target range; while eliminating the risk for hypoglycemia.43,64,65

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems (CGMS) for Hospitalized Patients

The limitations of point-of-care BG monitoring in the hospital highlight the great clinical need for an automated real-time CGMS that can accurately measure the concentration of glucose every few minutes, especially when managing ICU patients with intensive insulin therapy.57-60 Automation and standardization of the glucose measurement process have the potential to significantly improve BG control, clinical outcome, safety, and cost.64-70 CGMS could become the standard of care for BG management if the systems are easy to use in the clinical setting, significantly increase time in the target BG range, and eliminate the risk for moderate/severe hypoglycemia (Tables 1, 2, and 3).64-72

Table 1.

Vascular Catheter Blood-Sampling CGMS for Hospitalized Patients: Vascular CGMS Intermittently Transports Blood to an External Glucose Sensor.

Company name Product name Regulatory status/hospital use Sample location Glucose source Sensor location Measurement method Measurement frequency
Edwards Lifesciences GlucoClear CE Mark Catheter in peripheral vein Venous blood Sensor in catheter lumen Electrochemical/enzymatic 5 to 60 minutes
International Biomedical GlucoScout FDA-approved, no CE Catheter in peripheral vein, central vein, or radial artery Venous or arterial blood External sensor with tubing Electrochemical/enzymatic 5 to 60 minutes
B.Bruan ? Pending Catheter in peripheral vein, central vein, or radial artery Venous or arterial blood External sensor with tubing NIR absorption spectroscopy, electrochemical/enzymatic 5 to 60 minutes
Cascade Metrix CMI system Pending Catheter in peripheral vein, central vein, or radial artery Venous blood External sensor with tubing Electrochemical/enzymatic/NIR absorption spectroscopy 5 to 60 minutes
OptiScan Optiscaner CE Mark Catheter in central vein Venous blood transformed into plasma External sensor with tubing MIR absorption spectroscopy 15 minutes

Table 2.

Indwelling Vascular CGMS for Hospitalized Patients: Vascular CGMS Use an Optical Fiber and Fluorescence or a Micro-Dialysis Catheter and External Electrochemical Sensor.

Company name Product name Regulatory status/hospital use Sample location Glucose source Sensor location Measurement method Measurement frequency
Medtronic (GluMetrics technology) GluCath Pending Optical fiber in radial artery, peripheral vein, or central vein Venous or arterial blood Sensor in artery or vein lumen Boronic acid quenched fluorescence 1 to 5 minutes
GlySure GlySure CGMS Pending Optical fiber in central vein, peripheral vein, or radial artery Venous or arterial blood Sensor in artery or vein lumen Diboronic acid quenched fluorescence 1 minute
GlucoSet GlucoSet CGMS Pending Optical fiber in peripheral vein, central vein, or radial artery Venous or arterial blood Sensor in artery or vein lumen Boronic acid, change in hydrogel volume 1 to 5 minutes
Flowsion Diramo System Pending Micro-dialysis catheter in central vein, peripheral vein, or radial artery Dialysate from venous or arterial blood External sensor with tubing Quenched fluorescence 5 to 10 minutes
Maquet Critical Care Eirus System CE Mark Micro-dialysis catheter in central vein, peripheral vein, or radial artery Dialysate from venous or arterial blood External sensor with tubing Electrochemical/enzymatic 5 to 10 minutes
Probe Scientific MicroEye Pending Micro-dialysis catheter in central vein, peripheral vein, or radial artery Dialysate from venous or arterial blood External sensor with tubing Electrochemical/enzymatic 5 to 10 minutes
A. Menarini Diagnostics GlucoDay Pending for blood Micro-dialysis catheter in peripheral vein, central vein, or radial artery Dialysate from venous/arterial blood External sensor with tubing Electrochemical/enzymatic 5 to 10 minutes

Table 3.

Subcutaneous Tissue and Transdermal CGMS for Hospitalized Patients: CGMS Measure the Tissue Fluid Glucose Concentration, Not the BG Concentration.

Company name Product name Regulatory status/hospital use Sample location Glucose source Sensor location Measurement method Measurement frequency
A. Menarini Diagnostics GlucoDay CE Mark for ISF Micro-dialysis catheter in subcutaneous tissue Dialysate from ISF SC tissue Electrochemical/enzymatic 5 minutes
Roche Diagnostics ? Pending Electrochemical electrode in subcutaneous tissue Interstitial fluid SC tissue Multiple electrodes electrochemical/enzymatic/fluorescence 1-5 minutes
Medtronic MiniMed Medtronic Hospital Glucose Management System HGMS CE Mark Electrochemical electrodes in subcutaneous tissue Interstitial fluid SC tissue Multiple electrodes electrochemical/enzymatic 1-5 minutes
DexCom DexCom G4 Platinum Pending Electrochemical electrode in subcutaneous tissue Interstitial fluid SC tissue Electrochemical/enzymatic 1-5 minutes
Abbott Diabetes Freestyle Navigator II Pending Electrochemical electrode in subcutaneous tissue Interstitial fluid SC tissue Electrochemical/enzymatic 1-5 minutes
Echo Therapeutics Symphony tCGM System Pending Electrochemical electrode on skin surface; noninvasive Transdermal interstitial fluid Skin surface Electrochemical/enzymatic 1-5 minutes

Caregivers will observe the CGM data display during each patient encounter to assess the (1) glucose concentration (mg/dl or mmol/liter), (2) direction of glucose change (increasing, decreasing, or stable), and (3) rate of glucose change (slow, fast, or stable). The dose of intravenous (IV) and subcutaneous insulin will be adjusted frequently according to the glucose trend data using clinical protocols and computer algorithms.64-70 A caregiver will typically assess the risk for hypoglycemia during each patient encounter by glancing at the bedside display. A steep downward slope of glucose trend data will be easily recognized as a high-risk clinical situation requiring increased vigilance. Threshold and predictive alarms will also help to minimize the risk of mild/moderate hypoglycemia and eliminate the risk for severe and prolonged hypoglycemia.71,72

The use of real-time CGMS glucose measurements, trend data, and alarms has the potential to increase the safety of insulin administration and decrease cost due to a reduction in nursing time, decreased hospital length of stay, and improved patient outcomes.

Of interest, clinical use of current subcutaneous tissue CGMS during hospital trials actually increased the number of blood samples, point-of-care BG measurements, and nursing time required for glucose control.70,71,73 Nurses are required to calibrate the CGMS, follow the upward/downward trends in the CGMS glucose measurements, respond to alarms for hyper/hypoglycemia, obtain a patient blood sample, and measure the BG concentration before making any change in the insulin dose.39,41,43,73

A hospital CGMS will be routinely used by clinicians if it (1) decreases the amount of caregiver time and effort required for glucose monitoring and BG control, (2) is easy to set-up, calibrate, and use in a variety of hospital environments, (3) produces real-time glucose measurements with accuracy and reliability sufficient for dosing insulin, (4) has a low incidence of false alarms for hyper and hypoglycemia, (5) has a low incidence of device-related adverse events and no risk for a serious adverse event, and (6) has a cost/benefit ratio that justifies adding a new point-of-care technology for the critical care and general floors of the hospital.73-80

Subcutaneous Tissue CGMS for Hospitalized Patients

A few studies have shown that subcutaneous tissue CGMS sensors can be used in the hospital to continuously monitor the concentration of glucose in critically ill ICU patients and ambulatory patients on the general floors. The glucose trend data and alarms have been used to improve glucose control and minimize the incidence, severity, and duration of hypoglycemia.71,79-88 The CGMS sensors can be safely and easily inserted through the skin into the subcutaneous tissue of the abdomen, flank, thigh, and chest wall. It is important to insert the CGMS sensor using aseptic technique to minimize the risk for infection, especially in patients with decreased immunity due to cancer, HIV, corticosteroids and transplant medications. In addition, CGMS sensors should be monitored closed after insertion because significant bleeding can occur due to damaged blood vessels, especially in hospitalized patients with abnormal coagulation due to platelet inhibitors, anticoagulants, and liver failure.64,65,82,89-95

Several generations of the subcutaneous tissue enzyme-electrochemical CGMS developed by DexCom, Inc, Medtronic Diabetes, Inc, and Abbott Diabetes, Inc for outpatient DM management have been studied in a variety of hospital environments and patient populations.89-101 Many of the CGMS sensors correlated closely with reference BG measurements when calibrated 4 to 6 times per day. Some sensors, however, had a noisy output signal or drifted significantly and needed to be recalibrated more frequently.73,80,81,89,91-93,98-101

Medtronic developed a subcutaneous tissue CGMS optimized for hospitalized patients called the Hospital Glucose Management System® (HCMS). The HCMS sensor has 2 electrodes, each containing multiple glucose-oxidase electrochemical sensors attached to a bedside monitor that displays the glucose measurement once every minute.102 The HCMS recently received CE Mark approval for routine use in the ICU and general floors of the hospital. Sensor drift and variable time-lag forced regulatory authorities to label all of the subcutaneous tissue CGMS as adjunctive devices- limiting the clinical use of CGMS to tracking and trending with alarms. A nurse must obtain a blood sample and BG measurement prior to adjusting insulin therapy.38-45 Clinical trials are under way to evaluate whether a clinical nurse can use the subcutaneous tissue CGMS trend data to maintain a hospitalized patient’s BG concentration in the target range, eliminate hypoglycemia, and improve clinical outcomes.

Vascular Catheter Blood-Sampling CGMS for Hospitalized Patients

Vascular catheter CGMS have the potential to become a standard of care for the management of BG levels in the critical care units of the hospital. The near-continuous CGMS automatically transfer whole blood from a radial artery, peripheral vein, or central venous catheter to an external flow-through glucose sensor. A vascular catheter CGMS acquires a fresh blood sample every 5 to 15 minutes, measures the concentration of BG, and then flushes the sample back into the bloodstream using flush solution. Standardization of blood sample acquisition, analysis, and calibration will increase the accuracy and precision of the BG measurement, a major advantage of CGMS compared to routine clinical methods.43,64,65

Blood-sampling CGMSs attached to a peripheral IV catheter, however, are limited by the formation of thrombus within the vein and catheter lumens.103 Thrombus tends to form at the site of vascular wall injury immediately after catheter insertion. Plasma proteins, platelets, and clotting factors adhere to the catheter and endothelial cell surface, especially in regions of low blood flow.103-106 Platelets and clotting factors that adhere to the catheter surface and endothelial cells will break away in regions of high blood flow and shear forces, limiting the formation and propagation of thrombus. Aspiration of blood into the catheter lumen activates platelets and clotting factors.104-107 Rapid infusion of the activated platelets and factors back into the vein with flush solution can cause inflammation of the endothelial cells. Thrombus commonly forms on the injured endothelial cells, proximal to the catheter tip. Sample acquisition from a peripheral IV catheter commonly fails due to valves, lumen collapse, platelet plugs, and thrombus.103-107

When using a vascular catheter CGMS, it is important to avoid infusing a glucose-free or glucose-containing solution through an adjacent IV catheter to minimize contamination or dilution of the aspirated sample. A small amount of sample contamination with 5% dextrose solution (5000 mg/dl of glucose) can cause a large preanalytical error.53,55 Thrombus within the vein lumen can cause flush solution to be trapped near the catheter orifice; leading to acquisition of a diluted sample and a large preanalytical error. The majority of clinicians do not add heparin to the flush solution (1-4 units/ml) to minimize the risk for heparin-induced thrombocytopenia.43,64,65

Blood-sampling CGMS attached to a radial artery catheter should have a lower incidence of thrombus formation due to high blood flow and shear forces within the artery lumen. However, the region between a 20 gauge catheter (outer diameter 1.0 mm) and the radial artery wall (inner diameter 1.8 to 2.2 mm) becomes a low flow, low shear force environment.106,107 This leads to thrombus formation within the radial artery lumen, especially when sampling and flushing more frequently than once per hour. Flushing activated platelets and clotting factors back into the radial artery can cause capillary leakage and hand edema.

Blood-sampling CGMS attached to the proximal port of a central venous catheter (CVC) have the lowest incidence of thrombus formation due to the large diameter of the superior vena cava and high blood flow/shear forces.108 Requiring a CVC for sample acquisition significantly limits CGMS use to a subpopulation of medical and surgical patients managed in the critical care environment. Furthermore, dedicating a CVC port for glucose monitoring or placing a custom CVC necessitates advance planning. Vigilance is required to avoid sample contamination or dilution from solutions infused into the distal port of the CVC or a peripheral IV catheter.43,55,109

The following blood-sampling vascular catheter CGMSs are either available for clinical use or being evaluated to obtain regulatory approval in the United States and Europe:

The GlucoScout® (International Biomedical, Inc, Austin, TX, USA ) has Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clearance for monitoring the concentration of BG in blood sampled from a CVC, radial artery catheter, or a peripheral IV catheter as frequently as every 5 for 72 hours. The CGMS automatically transports a 1.6 ml sample of blood from the catheter into a sterile flow-through glucose oxidase electrochemical sensor. The concentration of BG is measured with sufficient accuracy to allow adjustments in insulin dose. Initial set-up requires a manual 2-point calibration using saline (0 mg/dl) and a salt-dextrose flush solution (82 mg/dl). The IV solution produces a 1-point calibration before every blood sample acquisition. Frequent sample acquisition can become unreliable and lead to volume overload because each sample is flushed back into the bloodstream using 6 ml of salt solution.109-111

The GlucoClear® CGMS (Edwards Lifesciences, Inc, Irvine, CA, USA ) is CE Mark approved for monitoring the concentration of BG in blood sampled from a peripheral IV catheter every 5 minutes for 72 hours. The CGMS automatically transports a 0.3 ml sample of blood into a glucose-oxidase enzyme electrochemical sensor located within the IV catheter lumen. The concentration of glucose is accurately measured by monitoring the quality of the blood sample and by performing a 1-point sensor calibration prior to every blood sample acquisition. The flush/calibration solution is manufactured with a standard concentration of glucose to ensure sensor accuracy. Heparin can be added to the flush solution to improve reliability and accuracy. Obstruction of venous blood flow by thrombus may cause reaspiration of flush solution and a preanalytical dilution error.112-115

The OptiScanner® (OptiScan, Inc, Hayward, CA, USA ) is CE Mark approved for monitoring the concentration of plasma glucose in blood sampled from the proximal port of a CVC every 15 minutes for 72 hours. The CGMS automatically transports a small sample of blood from the CVC to a bedside monitor that contains a centrifuge, spectrometer, and data display. The CGMS flushes the residual sample back into the bloodstream to minimize blood loss. Midinfrared spectroscopy is used to measure the concentration of plasma glucose. A robust calibration model was developed using absorption spectra from a wide variety of hospitalized patients.116-119 A multicenter clinical trial is currently under way in the United States to obtain FDA approval for real-time BG monitoring in critically ill hospitalized patients.

The CMI System (Cascade Metrix, Inc) consists of an automated blood sampling and glucose monitoring system attached to a peripheral IV catheter. The CGMS automatically transports a small volume of venous blood into an external flow-through glucose-oxidase enzyme electrochemical sensor. Clinical trials are currently under way to obtain CE Mark approval. A prior embodiment of the vascular CGMS demonstrated feasibility of using near-infrared absorption spectroscopy to measure the concentration of glucose in whole blood with satisfactory sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy.120

Indwelling Vascular CGMS for Hospitalized Patients

In contrast to the near-continuous blood-sampling vascular catheter CGMS described above, the indwelling CGMS technologies can provide a continuous measurement; and therefore a higher resolution of glucose trends.

The EIRUS® (Maquet Critical Care, AB Rastatt, Germany ) consists of a custom micro-dialysis CVC inserted into the superior vena cava, with an external fluidics system and a flow-through glucose-oxidase and lactate oxidase enzyme electrochemical sensor. The CGMS is CE Mark approved for monitoring the concentration of dialysate glucose and lactate every minute for 48 hours. Rapid blood flow and shear forces minimize fouling of the semipermeable porous membrane. Glucose-free dialysate is perfused through the dialysis catheter at a slow and constant rate. Glucose molecules in the plasma diffuse through the porous membrane into the dialysate with near-complete equilibration. The external sensor is automatically calibrated using standard glucose and lactate solutions.121-125

The GlySure Continuous Glucose Monitoring System (GlySure, Ltd, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom ) is a small optical fiber with a distal tip covered with diboronic acid and fluorescent chemistry surrounded by a semipermeable porous membrane coated with heparin. The optical fiber is inserted into the superior vena cava through the proximal port of a multilumen CVC. The luminescence chemistry has been optimized for glucose specificity and high sensitivity in the hypoglycemia range. Rapid blood flow and high shear forces minimize bio-fouling of the porous membrane. The CGMS has been submitted for CE Mark approval for monitoring the concentration of plasma glucose every minute for 48 to 72 hours.126,127

The GluCath® Intravascular CGMS (GluMetrics, Inc, Irvine, CA ) is a small diameter optical fiber tipped with boronic acid fluorescent chemistry. The optical fiber CGMS sensor is inserted through a 20 gauge catheter into the lumen of a radial artery. The chemistry was optimized to produce a large and rapid change in fluorescence signal following a small change in the BG concentration, especially in the hypoglycemia range. Clinical performance has been limited by variable blood flow and thrombus formation around the radial artery catheter and optical fiber sensor. The GluMetrics, Inc technology was recently acquired by the diabetes division of Medtronic MiniMed Inc (Northridge, CA, USA).128-132

The GlucoSet Continuous Glucose Monitoring CGMS (GlucoSet, AS Trondheim, Norway ) is a small-diameter optical fiber tipped with a hydrogel matrix incorporated with 3-phenylboronic acid. The optical fiber CGMS is inserted through a catheter into the radial artery lumen. The hydrogel volume contracts in direct response to an increase in the local glucose concentration, and expands following a decrease in the glucose concentration. An interferometer is used to accurately measure the diameter of the hydrogel. The optical fiber is covered with a heparinized semipermeable coating to facilitate the rapid diffusion of glucose and minimize the formation of thrombus. The CGMS is required to recognize a change in hydrogel volume due to glucose from a change in hydrogel volume due to arterial pulsations or body movement.133-134

Closed-Loop Artificial Pancreas Systems for the Hospitalized Patient

The Biostator® (Miles Laboratory, Elkhart, Indiana, USA ) was commercialized in the 1970s as the first closed-loop system artificial pancreas (AP) system for the hospital; followed by the Nikkiso STG-22® (Nikkiso Company, Ltd, Tokyo, Japan ) 30 years later. The 2 AP systems use real-time vascular CGMS and closed-loop algorithms to control the IV infusions of insulin and dextrose. Blood is continuously transported from a peripheral IV catheter to an external flow-through glucose-oxidase enzyme electrochemical sensor at 2 to 4 ml/hour. Heparin is infused into the IV catheter lumen to minimize thrombus formation within the tubing and sensor. Heparinized blood is continuously transported through the IV tubing into an external glucose sensor, then into a waste container.135-145

The closed-loop AP systems have been used to safely control the concentration of BG in a wide variety of medical and surgical patient populations in the hospital. The IV insulin/dextrose infusions are increased or decreased every 1 to 10 minutes based on the BG concentration and direction/rate of change.135-138,143-145 Furthermore, the AP systems have been used to safely perform glucose clamp and insulin pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic experiments by automatically adjusting the IV glucose infusion rate. Unfortunately, the current AP systems are too large and complex for routine clinical use at the bedside. In addition, sample acquisition can become unreliable and the systems remove a large volume of blood (60 to 120 ml) per day.135-145

Long-Term Implantable Vascular CGMS for Ambulatory Patients With Diabetes

There is also great clinical need for a long-term implantable vascular CGMS that can accurately measure the concentration of BG in ambulatory patients with T1DM and severe T2DM. The real-time CGMS trend data can be used to determine the optimum dose and timing of insulin therapy in relation to meals, activity, illness, and the circadian rhythm of cellular metabolism.

Vascular catheter CGMS have been designed with an enzyme-based electrochemical or oxygen sensor on the distal end, covered by a multilayered porous membrane. Long-term performance requires the porous channels of the membrane to remain patent so glucose and oxygen can passively diffuse from the plasma into the enzyme layer adjacent to the working electrode. The membrane structure and biomaterials are designed to minimize the adhesion of plasma proteins, platelets, red blood cells, white blood cells, thrombus, and fibrous tissue.146 Vascular CGMSs are typically implanted within the superior vena cava or aorta due to their large diameter, rapid velocity of blood flow and high shear-forces.104-108 For example, the vascular CGMS developed by Data Science International, Inc for rodent research requires implantation within the abdominal aorta to ensure reliable sensor performance for >60 days. Vascular CGMS failure may occur after several months due membrane degradation, enzyme denaturation, and/or electrode fouling.146-148

Medical Research Group, Inc (acquired by Medtronic) developed a long-term implantable vascular catheter CGMS that utilized glucose-oxidase/catalase enzymes and differential oxygen electrodes to measure the concentration of plasma glucose. A novel mechanical design and multilayered porous membrane ensured an excess supply of oxygen, protected the enzymes from degradation, and compensated for dynamic changes in the ambient oxygen concentration.149 Medtronic developed a long-term implantable AP system for human use that integrated this vascular CGMS with an implantable insulin pump. Feasibility trials demonstrated safe and effective AP system performance when using a PID closed-loop control algorithm (proportional-integral-derivative controller) in ambulatory patients with T1DM.150,151 The closed-loop AP system was not commercialized; perhaps due to cost, CGMS performance issues, and regulatory hurdles.

Animas Corporation, Inc developed a long-term implantable optical CGMS that utilized near-infrared (NIR) absorption spectroscopy to measure the concentration of BG in flowing blood. The miniature optical sensor head was implanted around the outside wall of a small artery or vein, similar to a blood flow probe used for animal research. A flexible cable connected the optical sensor head to a hermetically sealed package that contained electronics, optics, and a battery. Locating the light source and sample detector external/internal to the vessel wall produced high quality NIR spectra. The optical CGMS used multiple wavelengths, signal averaging, and a universal calibration model to measure the concentration of glucose in blood with satisfactory accuracy and specificity.152-155 The program was discontinued in 2005 following Animas’s acquisition by Johnson & Johnson, Inc.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this review summarizes many of the promising vascular CGMS previously developed, and being developed to help manage hospitalized patients and ambulatory patients with diabetes. There is greatly clinical need for an automated CGMS that provides an accurate measurement of the glucose concentration in blood, plasma, or tissue fluid.

Industry is trying to commercialize real-time vascular CGMS for the hospital that are safe, user-friendly, accurate, reliable, and easy to calibrate. Several of these systems have CE Mark approval and are being used by clinicians to manage patients in a wide variety of critical care environments. Technical difficulties remain, especially at the sensor-blood and sensor-tissue interface.

Insulin dosing algorithms are being developed and validated that utilize the real-time CGMS data to optimize the time a patient’s BG concentration is in the desired target BG zone, while eliminating the risk for moderate, severe, and prolonged hypoglycemia. Hospitalists and payers are waiting to review more clinical trial data that demonstrate an improvement in clinical outcome, prior to endorsing a new technology for glucose monitoring and control. A fully automated closed-loop AP system for hospitalized patients is an ultimate goal of this CGMS research.

Long-term implantable vascular and subcutaneous tissue CGMS continue to be developed in academia and industry with promising data. A safe, accurate, reliable, and easy-to-use long-term implantable CGMS would be a major breakthrough in the management of ambulatory patients with diabetes. A fully automated closed-loop AP system for ambulatory patients is an ultimate goal of this CGMS research.

Footnotes

Abbreviations: AP, artificial pancreas; BG, blood glucose; CE Mark, Conformité Européenne–Mark of Approval in Europe; CGM, continuous glucose monitor; CGMS, continuous glucose monitoring system; CVC, central venous catheter; DM, diabetes mellitus; FDA, Food and Drug Administration; HGMS, Hospital Glucose Management System; ICU, Intensive Care Unit; IV, intravenous; NIR, near-infrared; MIR, mid-infrared; RCT, randomized controlled trial; T1DM, type 1 diabetes; T2DM, type 2 diabetes.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: In the past 5 years, the following CGMS companies sponsored research at the Jefferson Artificial Pancreas Center, Department of Anesthesiology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, with JIJ as the principal investigator: Medtronic Diabetes, Edwards Lifesciences, DexCom, GluMetrics, Hospira, and Echo Therapeutics. JIJ was also a consultant to Medtronic Diabetes, Edwards Lifesciences, Becton Dickinson, Teleflex, and Echo Therapeutics. All funds were provided to the university. JIJ is currently a co-founder and equity owner of Capillary Biomedical, Inc. PJS is a co-founder, equity owner, and employee of Capillary Biomedical and formally an employee of GluMetrics. Capillary Biomedical Inc. is developing a long-term implantable CGMS and insulin delivery system. MCT had no potential conflicts to declare.

Funding: The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Department of Anesthesiology, Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA.

References

  • 1. Wexler DJ, Meigs JB, Cagliero E, Nathan DM, Grant RW. Prevalence of hyper- and hypoglycemia among inpatients with diabetes: a national survey of 44 U.S. hospitals. Diabetes Care. 2007;30:367-369. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Surveillance reports: reports: resource library: diabetes. http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/library/reports/surveillance.html. Accessed December 22, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Capes S, Hunt D, Malmberg K, Gerstein H. Stress hyperglycemia and increased risk of death after myocardial infarction in patients with and without diabetes: a systematic overview. Lancet. 2000;355(9206):773-778. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Pomposelli J, Baxter J, Babineau T, et al. Early postoperative glucose control predicts nosocomial infection rate in diabetic patients. J Parenter Enteral Nutr. 1998;22(2):77-81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Umpierrez G, Isaacs S, Bazargan N, You X, Thaler L, Kitabchi A. Hyperglycemia: an independent marker of in-hospital mortality in patients with undiagnosed diabetes. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002;87:978-982. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Krinsley JS. Association between hyperglycemia and increased hospital mortality in a heterogeneous population of critically ill patients. Mayo Clin Proc. 2003;78:1471-1478. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Vriesendorp TM, Morélis QJ, DeVries JH, Legemate DA, Hoekstra JBL. Early post-operative glucose levels are an independent risk factor for infection after peripheral vascular surgery. A retrospective study. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2004;28:520-525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Egi M, Bellomo R, Stachowski E, et al. Blood glucose concentration and outcome of critical illness: the impact of diabetes. Crit Care Med. 2008;36:2249-2255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Falciglia M, Freyberg RW, Almenoff PL, D’Alessio DA, Render ML. Hyperglycemia-related mortality in critically ill patients varies with admission diagnosis. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(12):3001-3009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Bochicchio G, Sung J, Joshi M, et al. Persistent hyperglycemia is predictive of outcome in critically ill trauma patients. J Trauma. 2005:58(5):921-924. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Mraovic B, Hipszer BR, Epstein RH, Pequignot EC, Parvizi J, Joseph JI. Preadmission hyperglycemia is an independent risk factor for in-hospital symptomatic pulmonary embolism after major orthopedic surgery. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25:64-70. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Kosiborod M, Rathore SS, Inzucchi SE, et al. Admission glucose and mortality in elderly patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction implications for patients with and without recognized diabetes. Circulation. 111;2005:3078-3086. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Ouattara A, Lecomte P, Le Manach Y, et al. Poor intraoperative blood glucose control is associated with a worsened hospital outcome after cardiac surgery in diabetic patients. Anesthesiology. 2005;103:687-694. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Fischer K, Lees J, Newman J. Hypoglycemia in hospitalized patients. N Engl J Med. 1986;315:1245-1250. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Cryer P. Hypoglycaemia: the limiting factor in the glycaemic management of the critically ill? Diabetologia. 2006;49(8):1722. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Krinsley J, Grover A, Severe hypoglycemia in critically ill patients: Risk factors and outcomes. Crit Care Med. 2007:35(10):2262-2267. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Egi M, Bellomo R, Stachowski E, et al. Hypoglycemia and outcome in critically ill patients. Mayo Clin Prox. 2010;85:217-224 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Finfer S, Liu B, Chittock DR, et al. Hypoglycemia and risk of death in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(12):1108-1118. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Vriesendorp T, De Vries J, van Santen S, et al. Evaluation of short-term consequences of hypoglycemia in an intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 2006;34:2714-2718. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Kagansky N, Levy S, Rimon E, et al. Hypoglycemia as a predictor of mortality in hospitalized elderly patients. Arch Int Med. 2003;163:1825-1829. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Thomas A, Boxall E, Twamley H. Evaluation of short-term consequences of hypoglycemia in an intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(4):1218-1219. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Krinsley J. Glycemic variability: a strong independent predictor of mortality in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2008;36:3008-3013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Krinsley J, Egi M, Kiss A, et al. Diabetic status and the relationship of the 3 domains of glycemic control to mortality in critically ill patients: an international multi-center cohort study. Crit Care 2013;17:R37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Egi M, Bellomo R, Stachowski E, French C, Hart G. Variability of blood glucose concentration and short-term mortality in critically ill patients. Anesthesiology. 2006;105:244-252. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Krinsley JS. Glycemic control in the critically ill—3 domains and diabetic status means one size does not fit all! Crit Care. 2013;17:131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Furnary A, Zerr K, Grunkemeier G, Starr A. Continuous intravenous insulin infusion reduces the incidence of deep sternal wound infection in diabetic patients after cardiac surgical procedures. Ann Thoracic Surg. 1999;67(2):352-360. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Zerr K, Furnary A, Grunkemeier G, Bookin S, Kanhere V, Starr A. Glucose control lowers the risk of wound infection in diabetics after open heart operations. Ann Thorac Surg. 1997;63:356-361. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Reed CC, Stewart RM, Sherman M, et al. Intensive insulin protocol improves glucose control and is associated with a reduction in intensive care unit mortality. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204(5):1048-1054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Van den Berghe G, Wouters P, Weekers F, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in the critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(19):1359-1367. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Finfer S, Chittock D, Su SYS, et al. Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:1283-1297. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Van den Berghe G, Wilmer A, Hermans G, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in the medical ICU. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(5):449-461. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. VISEP Trial. Current controlled trials: a multi-centre, open label, randomized controlled trial of two target ranges for glycaemic control in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Available at: http://controlled-trials.com/isrctn/trial/ISRCTN04968275/0/04969275.hlml. Accessed November 1, 2007.
  • 33. Malberg K. Prospective randomised study of intensive insulin treatment on long term survival after acute myocardial infarction in patients with diabetes mellitus. DIGAMI (Diabetes Mellitus, Insulin Glucose Infusion in Acute Myocardial Infarction) Study Group. BMJ. 1997;314:1512-1515. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Arabi YMM, Dabbagh OCM, Tamim HMM, et al. Intensive versus conventional insulin therapy: a randomized controlled trial in medical and surgical critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2008;36:3190-3197. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Brunkhorst F. Intensive insulin therapy and pentastarch resuscitation in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med. 2008;358;125-139. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Gandhi GY, Nuttall GA, Abel MD, et al. Intensive intraoperative insulin therapy versus conventional glucose management during cardiac surgery: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146(4):233-243. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Preiser JC, Devos P, Ruiz-Santana S, et al. A prospective randomized multi-center controlled trial on tight glucose control by intensive insulin therapy in adult intensive care units: the GluControl study. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35:1738-1748. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Lazar HL, McDonnell M, Chipkin SR, et al. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons practice guideline series: blood glucose management during adult cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;87(2):663-669. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Jacobi J, Bircher N, Krinsley J, et al. Guidelines for the use of an insulin infusion for the management of hyperglycemia in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(12):3251-3276. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Umpierrez GE, Hellman R, Korytkowski MT, et al. Management of hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients in non–critical care setting: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012;97:16-38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Moghissi ES, Korytkowski MT, DiNardo M, et al. American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American Diabetes Association consensus statement on inpatient glycemic control. Diabetes Care. 2009;32:1119-1131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Joshi GP, Chung F, Vann MA, et al. Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia consensus statement on perioperative blood glucose management in diabetic patients undergoing ambulatory surgery. Anesth Analg. 2010;111:1378-1387. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Finfer S, Wernerman J, Preiser JC, et al. Clinical review: consensus recommendations on measurement of blood glucose and reporting glycemic control in critically ill adults. Crit Care. 2013;17:229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Kavanagh BP. Glucose in the ICU—evidence, guidelines, and outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1259-1260. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Malhotra A. Intensive insulin in intensive care. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(5):516-518. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Clement S, Braithwaite S, Magee M, et al. Management of diabetes and hyperglycemia in hospitals. Diabetes Care. 2004:27:553-591. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Clement S. Better glycemic control in the hospital: beneficial and feasible. Cleve Clin J Med. 2007;74(2):111-120. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Murad MH, Coburn JA, Coto-Yglesias F, et al. Glycemic control in non-critically ill hospitalized patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012;97:49-58. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Joseph J. Management of the Diabetic Surgical Patient, Textbook of Type 2 Diabetes. Valley Stream, NY: Martin Dunitz; 2007. [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Aragon D. Evaluation of nursing work effort and perceptions about blood glucose testing in tight glycemic control. Am J Crit Care. 2006;15:370-377. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Kulkarni A, Saxena M, Price G, O’Leary MJ, Jacques T, Myburgh JA. Analysis of blood glucose measurements using capillary and arterial blood samples in intensive care patients. Intensive Care Med. 2005;31:142-145. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Karon BS, Gandhi GY, Nuttall GA, et al. Accuracy of Roche Accu-Chek Inform whole blood capillary, arterial, and venous glucose values in patients receiving intensive intravenous insulin therapy after cardiac surgery. Am J Clin Pathol. 2007;127(6):919-926. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Flood J, Joseph J, Kim L, McNulty S, Chervoneva I. Glucose levels in blood simultaneously sampled from the radial artery, vena cava, and fingertip. Paper presented at: American Society Anesthesiology; October 2007; San Francisco, CA. [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Nayak PP, Morris K, Lang H, et al. Lack of agreement between arterial and central venous blood glucose measurement in critically ill children. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35(4):762-763. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Food and Drug Administration. Adverse event report November 12, 1997. VIA01 glucose monitoring system. www.fda.gov. Accessed November 1, 2007.
  • 56. Kuwa K, Nakayama T, Hoshino T, Tominaga M. Relationships of glucose concentrations in capillary whole blood, venous whole blood, and venous plasma. Clin Chim Acta. 2001;307:187-192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Dungan K, Chapman J, Braithwaite SS, Buse J. Glucose measurement: confounding issues in setting targets for inpatient management. Diabetes Care. 2007;30(2):403-409. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Fahy BG, Coursin DB. Critical glucose control: the devil is in the details. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83(4):394-397. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Finkielman JD, Oyen LJ, Afessa B. Agreement between bedside blood and plasma glucose measurement in the ICU setting. Chest. 2005;127(5):1749-1751. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Slater-MacLean L, Cembrowski G, Chin D, et al. Accuracy of glycemic measurements in the critically ill. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2008;10(3):169-177. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Desachy A, Vuagnat AC, Ghazali AD, et al. Accuracy of bedside glucometry in critically ill patients: influence of clinical characteristics and perfusion index. Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;83(4):400-405. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Sylvain HF, Pokorny ME, English SM, et al. Accuracy of fingerstick glucose values in shock patients. Am J Crit Care. 1995;4(1):44-48. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Sacks D, Bruns D, Horton J, et al. Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute. POCT12-A3: Point-of-care blood glucose testing in acute and chronic care facilities; approved guideline–third edition. January 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Wernerman J, Desaive T, Finfer S, et al. Continuous glucose control in the ICU: report of a 2013 round table meeting. Crit Care. 2014;18:226. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Joseph JI, Hipszer B, Mraovic B, Chervoneva I, Joseph M, Grunwald Z. Clinical need for continuous glucose monitoring in the hospital. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2009;3(6):1309-1318. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. Weiss R, Lazar I. The need for continuous blood glucose monitoring in the intensive care unit. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2007;1(3):412-414. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67. Inzucchi S, Kosiborod M. Continuous glucose monitoring during critical care. Anesthesiology. 2011;114(1):18-19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68. Martinez E, Williams K, Pronovost P. Thinking like a pancreas: perioperative glycemic control. Anesth Analg. 2007;104(1):4-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69. Torjman MC, Goldberg ME, Hirsh RA, Littman J. Thinking like a pancreas: a look ahead at diabetes technology in the perioperative setting. Anesth Analg. 2007;105(2):545. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Mraovic B. Analysis: continuous glucose monitoring during intensive insulin therapy. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2009;3(4):960-963. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Holzinger U, Warszawska J, Kitzberger R, et al. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring in critically ill patients a prospective randomized trial. Diabetes Care. 2010;33:467-472. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Ryan M, Savarese V, Hipszer B, et al. Continuous glucose monitor shows potential for early hypoglycemia detection in hospitalized patients. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2009;11(11):745-747. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73. Piper HG, Alexander JL, Shukla A, et al. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring in pediatric patients during and after cardiac surgery. Pediatrics. 2006;118(3):1176-1184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Krinsley J. Is glycemic control of the critically ill cost-effective? Hosp Pract. 2014;42:4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. Scurlock C, Raikhelkar J, Mechanick JI. The economics of glycemic control in the ICU in the United States. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2011;14:209-212. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76. Van den Berghe G, Wouters P, Kestesteloot K, Hilleman DE, Analysis of healthcare resource utilization with intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(3):612-616. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77. Zijlstra JG, Corstjens AM, Tulleken JE, Meertens JH, Ligtenberg JJ. Cost analysis of intensive glycemic control in critically ill adult patients. Chest. 2006;130(6):1953-1954. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78. Krinsley J, Jones RL. Cost analysis of intensive glycemic control in critically ill adult patients. Chest. 2006;129(3):644-650. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79. Signal M, Pretty CG, Chase JG, Le Compte A, Shaw GM. Continuous glucose monitors and the burden of tight glycemic control in critical care: can they cure the time cost? J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2010;4(3):625-635. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80. Boom DT, Sechterberger MK, Rijkenberg S, et al. Insulin treatment guided by subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring compared to frequent point-of-care measurement in critically ill patients: a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care. 2014;18:453. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81. Agus MS, Steil GM, Wypij D, et al. Tight glycemic control versus standard care after pediatric cardiac surgery. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1208-1219. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82. Vriesendorp TM, DeVries JH, Holleman F, et al. The use of two continuous glucose sensors during and after surgery. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2005;7:315-322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83. Wintergerst KA, Deiss D, Buckingham B, et al. Glucose control in pediatric intensive care unit patients using an insulin-glucose algorithm. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2007;9(3):211-222. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84. Kopecký P, Mráz M, Bláha J, et al. The use of continuous glucose monitoring combined with computer-based eMPC algorithm for tight glucose control in cardio-surgical ICU. BioMed Res Int. 2013:186439 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/186439. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85. Chee F, Fernando T, van Heerden PV. Closed-loop control of blood glucose levels in critically ill patients. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2002;30(3):295-307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86. Chee F, Fernando T, van Heerden PV. Closed-loop glucose control in critically-ill patients using continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) in real-time. IEEE Trans Info Technol Biomed. 2003;7:43-53. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87. Chase JG, Shaw GM, Lin J, et al. Targeted glycemic reduction in critical care using closed-loop control. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2005;7(2):274-282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88. Leelarathna L, English SW, Thabit H, et al. Feasibility of fully automated closed-loop glucose control utilizing continuous subcutaneous glucose measurements in critical illness: a randomized controlled trial. Crit Care. 2013;17:R159. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89. Logtenberg S, Kleefstra N, Snellen F, et al. Pre- and postoperative accuracy and safety of a real-time continuous glucose monitoring system in cardiac surgical patients: a randomized pilot study. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2009;11:31-37. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90. De Block C, Manuel-Y-Keenoy B, Van Gaal L, Rogiers P. Intensive insulin therapy in the intensive care unit: assessment by continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:1750-1756. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91. Brunner R, Kitzberger R, Miehsler W, Herkner H, Madl C, Holzinger U. Accuracy and reliability of a subcutaneous continuous glucose-monitoring system in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2011;39:659-664. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92. Price GC, Stevenson K, Walsh TS. Evaluation of a continuous glucose monitor in an unselected general intensive care population. Crit Care Resusc. 2008;10(3):209-216. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93. Rabiee A, Virginia Andreasik RN, Abu-Hamdah R, et al. Numerical and clinical accuracy of a continuous glucose monitoring system during intravenous insulin therapy in the surgical and burn intensive care units. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2009;3(4):951-959. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94. Goldberg PA, Siegel MD, Russell RR, et al. Experience with the continuous glucose monitoring system in a medical intensive care unit. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2004;6(3):339-347. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95. Vriesendorp TM, DeVries JH, Holleman F, Dzoljic M, Hoekstra JB. The use of two continuous glucose sensors during and after surgery. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2005;7(2):315-322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96. Coss-Bu JA, Jefferson LS, Stone-McCord S, et al. Evaluation of a real-time blood glucose monitor in children with diabetic ketoacidosis. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 1999;44(3):175-181. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97. Allen HF, Rake A, Roy M, Brenner D, McKiernan CA. Prospective detection of hyperglycemia in critically ill children using continuous glucose monitoring. Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2008;9(2):153-158. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98. Holzinger U, Warszawska J, Kitzberger R, et al. Impact of shock requiring norepinephrine on the accuracy and reliability of subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35:1383-1389. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99. Corstjens AM, Ligtenberg JJM, Van der Horst ICC, et al. Accuracy and feasibility of point-of-care and continuous blood glucose analyses in critically ill ICU patients. Crit Care. 2006;10(5):R135. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100. Holzinger U, Warszawska J, Kitzberger R, et al. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring in critically ill patients. Diabetes Care. 2010;33:467-472. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101. Hipszer B, Joseph JI. Lag associated with interstitial glucose sensors used in a diabetic surgical patient. Anesthesiology. 2006;105:A584. [Google Scholar]
  • 102. Kosiborod M, Gottlieb RK, Sekella JA, et al. Performance of the Medtronic Sentrino continuous glucose management (CGM) system in the cardiac intensive care unit. BMJ Open Diabetes Care. 2014;2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103. Kagel E, Rayan G. Intravenous catheter complications in the hand and forearm. J Trauma. 2004;56(1):123-127. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104. Colman R, Marder V, Salzman E, Hirsh J. Overview of hemostasis. In: Marder VJ, et al., eds. Hemostasis and Thrombosis: Basic Principles and Clinical Practice. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott; 1994:3-18. [Google Scholar]
  • 105. Turritto VT, Baumgartner HR. Initial deposition of platelets and fibrin on vascular surfaces in flowing blood. In: Marder VJ, et al., eds. Hemostasis and Thrombosis: Basic Principles and Clinical Practice. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott; 1994:805-822. [Google Scholar]
  • 106. Leonard E. Rheology of thrombosis. In: Marder VJ, et al., eds. Hemostasis and Thrombosis: Basic Principles and Clinical Practice. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott; 1994:1211-1223 [Google Scholar]
  • 107. Salzman E, Merrill E, Kent C. Interaction of blood with artificial surfaces. In: Marder VJ, et al., eds. Hemostasis and Thrombosis: Basic Principles and Clinical Practice. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott; 1994:1469-1485. [Google Scholar]
  • 108. Joseph JI, Hipszer B. Real-time glucose monitoring in the hospital: future or now? Adv Surg. 2010;44:165-184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109. Ganesh A, Hipszer B, Loomba N, Torjman MC, Joseph J. Evaluation of the VIA blood chemistry monitor for glucose in healthy and diabetic volunteers. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2008;2(2):182-193. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110. Bailey P, McJames S, Cluff M, Wells D, Orr J, Wenternskow D. Evaluation in volunteers of the VIA V-ABG automated bedside blood gas, chemistry, and hematocrit monitor. J Clin Monit Comput. 1998;14:339-346. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111. Lucisano JY, Edelman SV, Quinto BD, Wong DK. Development of a biosensor-based, patient-attached blood glucose monitoring system. Proc Am Chem Soc. 1997;76:256. [Google Scholar]
  • 112. Foubert L, Lecomte P, Nobels F, Gulino A, De Decker K. Accuracy of a feasibility version of an intravenous continuous glucose monitor in volunteers with diabetes and hospitalized patients. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2014;16:858-866. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113. Joseph J, Hipszer B, Grunwald Z, et al. Performance of an automated blood glucose monitor in the OR-ICU. Paper presented at: American Society of Anesthesiology; October 2009; New Orleans, LA. [Google Scholar]
  • 114. Bochicchio G, Hipszer B, Magee M, et al. Multicenter Observational Study of the First-Generation Intravenous Blood Glucose Monitoring System in Hospitalized Patients. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015. ;9:739-750. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 115. Bailey T, Gulino A, Higgins M, Leach J, Kamath A, Simpson P. Accuracy of a first-generation intravenous blood glucose monitoring system in subjects with diabetes mellitus: a multicenter study. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2013;7(6):1484-1491. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116. Van Hooijdonk R, Winters T, Fischer J, et al. Accuracy and limitations of continuous glucose monitoring using spectroscopy in critically ill patients. Ann Intensive Care. 2014;4:8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117. Krinsley J, Bochicchio K, Calentine C, Bochicchio G. Glucose measurement of intensive care unit patient plasma samples using a fixed-wavelength mid-infrared spectroscopy system. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2012;6:294-301. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118. Jax T, Heise T, Nosek L, Gable J, Lim G, Calentine C. Automated near- continuous glucose monitoring measured in plasma using mid-infrared spectroscopy. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011;5:345-352. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119. Umbrello M, Salice V, Spanu P, et al. Performance assessment of a glucose control protocol in septic patients with an automated intermittent plasma glucose monitoring device. Clin Nutr. 2014;33:867-871. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120. Kunjan K, Lloyd P. Automated blood sampling and glucose sensing in critical care settings. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2008;2(2):194-200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121. Schierenbeck F, Franco-Cereceda A, Liska J. Evaluation of a continuous blood glucose monitoring system using central venous micro dialysis. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2012;6(6):1365-1371. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122. Moller F, Liska J, Eidhagen F, Franco-Cereceda A. Intravascular microdialysis as a method for measuring glucose and lactate during and after cardiac surgery. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011;5(5):1099-1107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123. Schierenbeck F, Öwall A, Franco-Cereceda A, Liska J. Evaluation of a continuous blood glucose monitoring system using a central venous catheter with an integrated micro dialysis function. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013;15(1):26-31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 124. Schierenbeck F, Nijsten MWN, Franco-Cereceda A, Liska J. Introducing intravascular microdialysis for continuous lactate monitoring in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: a prospective observational study. Crit Care. 2014;18(2):R56. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 125. Schierenbeck F, Wallin M, Franco-Cereceda A, Liska J. Evaluation of intravascular microdialysis for continuous blood glucose monitoring in hypoglycemia: an animal model. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2014;8:839-844. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 126. Prasad M, Gopal P, Mannam G. Continuous monitoring of blood glucose using a fiberoptic-based intravascular sensor during postoperative care in the ICU. Crit Care. 2014;18(suppl 1):442.25041935 [Google Scholar]
  • 127. Crane B, Barwell N, Jones C, Mackenzie A, Mulavisala KP. The Development of a Continuous Intravascular Glucose Monitoring Sensor. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015; 9:751-761. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 128. Strasma P, Finfer S, Flower O, et al. Use of an Intravascular Fluorescent Continuous Glucose Sensor in ICU Patients. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015; 9:762-770. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 129. Machado P, Liu JB, Hipszer B, et al. Use of ultrasound to monitor blood flow and thrombus formation around a radial artery catheter and intravascular glucose sensor in surgical patients, Paper presented at: American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine; March 29-April 2, 2014; Las Vegas, NV. [Google Scholar]
  • 130. Peyser T, Zisser H, Khan U, et al. Use of a novel fluorescent glucose sensor in volunteer subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2011;5(3):687-693. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 131. Romey M, Jovanovič L, Bevier W, Markova K, Strasma P, Zisser H. Use of an intravascular fluorescent continuous glucose sensor in subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2012;6(6):1260-1266. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 132. Flower OJ, Bird S, Macken L, et al. Continuous intra-arterial blood glucose monitoring using quenched fluorescence sensing: a product development study. Crit Care Resusc. 2014;16(1):54-61. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 133. Skjaervold N, Sollig S, Hjelme DR, Asadahl P. Continuous measurement of blood glucose. Anesthesiology. 2011;114:120-125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 134. Skjaervold N, Östling D, Hjelme D, Spigset O, Lyng O, Aadahl P. Blood glucose control using a novel continuous blood glucose monitor and repetitive intravenous insulin boluses: exploiting natural insulin pulsatility as a principle for a future artificial pancreas. Int J Endocrinol. 2013;2013:245152. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 135. Kadish AH. A servomechanism for blood sugar control. Biomed Sci Instrum. 1963;1:171-176. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 136. Kadish AH. Automation control of blood sugar: a servomechanism for glucose monitoring and control. Am J Med Electron. 1964;3:82-86. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 137. Clemens AH, Chang PH, Myers RW. The development of Biostator, a glucose controlled insulin infusion system (GCIIS). Horm Metab Res. 1977;7(suppl):23-33. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 138. Albisser AM, Leibel BS, Ewart TF, et al. Clinical control of diabetes by the artificial pancreas. Diabetes. 1974;23(5):397-404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 139. Yamashita K, Okabayashi T, Yokoyama T, et al. The accuracy of a continuous blood glucose monitor during surgery. Anesth Analg. 2008;106(1):160-163. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 140. Yamashita K, Okabayashi T, Yokoyama T, et al. Accuracy and reliability of continuous blood glucose monitor in post-surgical patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2009;53(1):66-71. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 141. Ozyol MB, Herfarth C, Kerner W, Pfeiffer EF. Postoperative blood-sugar regulation in pancreatectomized patients using the artificial “beta cell.” Chirurg. 1979;50(4):227-232. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 142. Gin H, Catargi B, Rigalleau V, Rullier E, Roger P, Tabarin A. Experience with the Biostator for diagnosis and assisted surgery of 21 insulinomas. Eur J Endocrinol. 1998;139(4):371-377. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 143. Okabayashi T, Hnazaki K, Nishimori I, et al. Continuous post-operative blood glucose monitoring and control using a closed-loop system in patients undergoing hepatic resection. Dig Dis Sci. 2008;53(5):1405-1410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 144. Takahashi G, Sato N, Matsumoto N, et al. Preliminary study on glucose control with an artificial pancreas in postoperative sepsis patients. Eur Surg Res. 2011;47:32-38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 145. Maeda H, Okabayashi T, Yatabe T, Yamashita K, Hanazaki K. Perioperative intensive insulin therapy using artificial endocrine pancreas in patients undergoing pancreatectomy. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15(33):4111-4115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 146. Joseph JI, Torjman MC. Implantable glucose sensors. In: Wnek G, Bowlin GL, eds. Encyclopedia of Biomaterials and Biomedical Engineering. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker; 2004:683-692. [Google Scholar]
  • 147. Brockway R, Tiesma S, Bogie H, et al. Fully Implantable Arterial Blood Glucose Device for Metabolic Research Applications in Rats for Two Months. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2015; 9:771-781. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 148. Tiesma S, Brockway R, Coskun T, O’Farrell L, Michael MD, Cox A. Assessment of insulin response in STZ rats using continuous glucose telemetry. Paper presented at: American Diabetes Association; June 15, 2014; Alexandria, VA. [Google Scholar]
  • 149. Armour JC, Lucisano JY, McKean BD, Gough DA. Application of chronic intravascular blood glucose sensor in dogs. Diabetes. 1990;39(12):1519-1526. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 150. Renard E, Costalat G, Chevassus H, Bringer J. Artificial beta-cell: clinical experience toward an implantable closed-loop insulin delivery system. Diabetes Metab. 2006;32:497-502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 151. Renard E, Costalat G, Chevassus H, Bringer J. Artificial beta cell: clinical experience toward an implantable closed-loop insulin delivery system. Diabetes Metab. 2006;32(5 pt 2):497-502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 152. Crothall K, Joseph J, Torjman M, et al. Development of an implantable NIR spectroscopic blood glucose sensor: in-vivo results in dogs. Paper presented at: American Diabetes Association; June 1999; San Diego, CA. [Google Scholar]
  • 153. Joseph J, Torjman MC, Moritz M, Destephano M. Long-term implantable optical blood glucose sensor. Paper presented at: Association of Chemical Engineering; 2000; Boston, MA . [Google Scholar]
  • 154. Joseph J, Destephano M, Torjman MC, Moritz M, Crothall K, Jahn L. Development of an implantable optical glucose sensor. Paper presented at: Pittsburgh Conference; 2001; Pittsburgh, PA. [Google Scholar]
  • 155. Yu Y, Crothal K, Jahn L, DeStefano M. Laser diode applications in a continuous blood glucose sensor. Proc SPIE. 2003;4996:268-274. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology are provided here courtesy of Diabetes Technology Society

RESOURCES