Manov Andre E, Holt Nathan, Dini Esar, Rivera Ranier, Donepudi Ashrita, Haddadin Rakahn, Mefferd Kyle, Qadir Inam
Internal Medicine, Sunrise Health Consortium Graduate Medical Education (GME), Las Vegas, USA.
Transitional Year, MountainView Hospital, Las Vegas, USA.
Cureus. 2024 Mar 23;16(3):e56768. doi: 10.7759/cureus.56768. eCollection 2024 Mar.
We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study between 2020 and 2023 in 26 patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) who were using 3-4 injections per day of insulin and were monitored by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The goal of this retrospective observational cohort study is to compare these two metrics in an internal medicine community primary care residency clinic. We used CGM devices, Dexcom G6 and G7, and Freestyle Libre 3. The goal was to compare the patient's hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) taken during their clinic visit by phlebotomy as a marker for diabetic control with an estimated HbA1c glucose management indicator (GMI) derived from the 30-day CGM readings. HbA1c is derived from the blood, while the GMI value is derived from the interstitial fluid. Both parameters were taken within 30 days of each other. GMI was taken in the last 30 days. We excluded patients with known anemia, chronic kidney disease, polycythemia, cirrhosis of the liver, or metabolic dysfunction associated with steatohepatitis (MASH) because disease states can affect the measured HbA1c. Also, pregnant and African American patients were excluded. We concluded the measured HbA1c was 0.34% (4 mmol/mol) higher than the CGM-derived GMI. The relationship between factors that affect glycemic control was discussed in the article, as well as the future utilization of them in improving diabetic control and management. As the use of CGM continues to grow, addressing differences between laboratory-measured HbA1c and CGM-derived GMI is critical.
2020年至2023年期间,我们对26例1型和2型糖尿病患者进行了一项回顾性观察队列研究,这些患者每天使用3 - 4次胰岛素注射,并通过持续葡萄糖监测(CGM)进行监测。这项回顾性观察队列研究的目的是在内科社区初级保健住院诊所比较这两个指标。我们使用了CGM设备,德康G6和G7以及弗里estyle Libre 3。目的是将患者在诊所就诊时通过静脉采血测得的糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)作为糖尿病控制的指标,与从30天CGM读数得出的估计HbA1c血糖管理指标(GMI)进行比较。HbA1c来自血液,而GMI值来自组织间液。这两个参数在彼此30天内获取。GMI取最近30天的数据。我们排除了已知患有贫血、慢性肾病、红细胞增多症、肝硬化或与脂肪性肝炎相关的代谢功能障碍(MASH)的患者,因为这些疾病状态会影响测得的HbA1c。此外,孕妇和非裔美国患者也被排除。我们得出结论,测得的HbA1c比CGM得出的GMI高0.34%(4 mmol/mol)。文章讨论了影响血糖控制的因素之间的关系,以及它们未来在改善糖尿病控制和管理中的应用。随着CGM的使用持续增加,解决实验室测得的HbA1c与CGM得出的GMI之间的差异至关重要。