Skip to main content
. 2017 May 13;8(3):489–506. doi: 10.1007/s13300-017-0263-6

Table 2.

Results of the PubMed search for long-term studies (≥5 days) with eligible data published between 2014 and 2016 on continuous closed-loop versus open-loop control during the day

Study Included (N) HbA1c (%) Evaluated
(N)
Observation period Physical activity during CL period CL period CGM Algorithm Defined glucose range
(mmol/L)
Time in hypoglycemia (%) Time in euglycemia
(%)
Time in hyperglycemia
(%)
OL CL
Leelarathna [35] 21 adults 7.6 17 7 d 7 d Advised not to drive or to undertake strenuous physical exercise under CL, but usual daily activities were allowed

83.0% of the

total time (day and night)

FreeStyle

Navigator; Abbott

Control to range MPC [3.9, 10] 72.5 CL vs 65.4 OL (s)#
Thabit [30] 33 adults 8.5 32 CL, 33 OL 12 w 12 w CL not used during physical activity during the initial 2 weeks 08.00–24.00 FreeStyle Navigator, Abbott Control to range MPC [3.9, 10] 3.0 CL vs 2.7 OL (ns) 62.9 CL vs 56.2 OL (s) 33.9 CL vs 39.7 OL (s)
De Bock [37] 8 adults/adolescents 7.5 8 5 d 5 d NR NI Enlite II, MiniLink REAL-time sensor,Medtronic PID [4.0, 9.9] NI 66.7 CL vs 57.5 OL (ns)# NI
Renard [31] 20 adults 8.2 20 1 m 1 m NR 08.00–20.00 G4 Platinum, Dexcom Control to target MPC [3.9, 10] 2.3 CL vs 3.4 OL (s) 64.9 CL vs 60.7 OL (ns) 32.8 CL vs 35.8 OL (ns)

The studies had no restrictions regarding meals

s significant, p ≤ 0.05

ns nonsignificant, p > 0.05

HbA1c values and values for the percentage of time that glucose was within the defined range are reported as mean values unless they are labeled as median values

#Median, d days, w weeks, m months, CGM continuous glucose measurement, CL closed loop, OL open loop, NR no restrictions, NS not specified, MPC model predictive control, PID-IFB proportional integral derivative insulin feedback, NI no information