Home > News > Advantages and Disadvantages of Realtime Continuous Glucose Monitoring in People with Type 2 Diabetes
Diabetes
Read Time: 2 mins

Advantages and Disadvantages of Realtime Continuous Glucose Monitoring in People with Type 2 Diabetes

Published Online: May 14th 2012 US Endocrinology, 2012;8(1):22-6 DOI: http://doi.org/10.17925/USE.2012.08.01.22
Authors: M Susan Walker, Stephanie J Fonda, Sara Salkind, Robert A Vigersky
Quick Links:
Abstract
Article
Article Information
Abstract:
Overview

Previous research has shown that realtime continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) is a useful clinical and lifestyle aid for people with type 1 diabetes. However, its usefulness and efficacy for people with type 2 diabetes is less known and potentially controversial, given the continuing controversy over the efficacy of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in this cohort. This article reviews the extant literature on RT-CGM for people with type 2 diabetes, and enumerates several of the advantages and disadvantages of this technology from the perspective of providers and patients. Even patients with type 2 diabetes who are not using insulin and/or are relatively well controlled on oral medications have been shown to spend a significant amount of time each day in hyperglycemia. Additional tools beyond SMBG are necessary to enable providers and patients to clearly grasp and manage the frequency and amplitude of glucose excursions in people with type 2 diabetes who are not on insulin. While SMBG is useful for measuring blood glucose levels, patients do not regularly check and SMBG does not enable many to adequately manage blood glucose levels or capture marked and sustained hyperglycemic excursions. RT-CGM systems, valuable diabetes management tools for people with type 1 diabetes or insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, have recently been used in type 2 diabetes patients. The extant studies, although few, have demonstrated that the use of RT-CGM has empowered people with type 2 diabetes to improve their glycemic control by making and sustaining healthy lifestyle choices.

Keywords

Type 2 diabetes, realtime continuous glucose monitoring systems, advantages and disadvantages

Article:

Realtime continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM), which provides a glucose reading and trend every five minutes for up to seven days, is a valuable diabetes management tool for people with type 1 diabetes who, in their quest for tight glycemic control, are particularly vulnerable to severe and potentially life-threatening hypoglycemia. The value of RT-CGM for people with type 2 diabetes is less well recognized, particularly for those who are non-insulin treated.

Realtime continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM), which provides a glucose reading and trend every five minutes for up to seven days, is a valuable diabetes management tool for people with type 1 diabetes who, in their quest for tight glycemic control, are particularly vulnerable to severe and potentially life-threatening hypoglycemia. The value of RT-CGM for people with type 2 diabetes is less well recognized, particularly for those who are non-insulin treated. This paper reviews the still nascent literature documenting the efficacy of RT-CGM in people with type 2 diabetes and then addresses the advantages and disadvantages of itsuse from the perspectives of the healthcare provider and the patient.

Previous Studies Documenting Efficacy of Realtime Continuous Glucose Monitoring in People with Type 2 Diabetes
The few studies that have examined the clinical efficacy of RT-CGM in people with type 2 diabetes are shown in Table 1. These studies show that RT-CGM may be useful in modifying lifestyle habits and choices and can exert a positive effect for as long as a year beyond the intervention. Using an RT-CGM system as a ‘motivational device’, Yoo et al. conducted a prospective, open-label, randomized controlled trial (RCT) of RT-CGM compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in 65 adult patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (8.0 % ≤ glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] ≤10 %) over a three-month period.1 The intervention group used the RT-CGM device for three days each month for three months and the control group continued SMBG at least four times a week for three months. Compared with the SMBG group, the RT-CGM group demonstrated a more significant reduction in HbA1c (-1.1 % versus -0.4 %), a larger increase in the exercise time per week (+158 minutes versus +43 minutes), and a more pronounced trend toward a decreasein body weight (-2.2 kg versus -1.4 kg). The researchers also measured the mean amplitude of glucose excursion (MAGE) with each RT-CGM application; there was a statistically significant decrease in MAGE between Month 1 and Months 2 and 3.

To view the full article in PDF or eBook formats, please click on the icons above.

Article Information:
Disclosure

The authors’ study evaluating the effect of realtime continuous glucose monitoring on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes was funded by DexCom, Inc.

Correspondence

M Susan Walker, PhD, RN, CDE, Diabetes Institute, Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, 8901 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20889-5600, US. E: Susan.Walker@med.navy.mil

Support

The opinions expressed in this paper reflect the personal views of the authors and not the official views of the US Army or the Department of Defense.

Received

2012-06-11T00:00:00

References

  1. Yoo HJ, An HG, Park SY, et al., Use of a real time continuous monitoring system as a motivational device for poorly controlled type 2 diabetes, Diabetes Res Clin Pract, 2008;82(1):73–9.
  2. Vigersky RA, Fonda SJ, Chellappa M, et al., Short and long term effects of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in patients with type 2 diabetes, Diabetes Care, 2012,35(1):32–8.
  3. Fonda SJ, Graham C, Samyshkin Y, et al., Cost-Effectiveness of Real-Time Continuous Glucose Monitoring (RT-CGM) in Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM), Presented at the American Diabetes Association 72nd Scientific Sessions, Philadelphia, PA, June 8–12, 2012;late-breaking abstract.
  4. Garg S, Zisser H, Schwartz S, et al., Improvement in glycemic excursions with a transcutaneous, real-time continuous glucose sensor: a randomized controlled trial, Diabetes Care, 2006;29(1):44–50.
  5. Bailey, TS, Zisser HC, Garg SK, Reduction in hemoglobin A1C with real-time continuous glucose monitoring: results from a 12-week observational study, Diabetes Technol Ther, 2007;9(3):203–10.
  6. Fritschi C, Quin L, Penckofer S, Surdyk PM, Continuous glucose monitoring: the experience of women with type 2 diabetes, Diabetes Educ, 2010;36(2):250–7.
  7. Allen N, Whittemore R, Melkus G, A continuous glucose monitoring and problem-solving intervention to change physical activity behavior in women with type 2 diabetes: a pilot study, Diabetes Technol Ther, 2011;13(11):1091–9.
  8. Giacco R, Brownlee M, Oxidative stress and diabetic complications, Circ Res, 2010;107(9):1058–70.
  9. Monnier L, Mas E, Ginet C, et al., Activation of oxidative stress by acute glucose fluctuations compared with sustained chronic hyperglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes, JAMA, 2006;295(14):1681–7.
  10. Hirsch IB, Brownlee M, Should minimal blood glucose variability become the gold standard of glycemic control? J Diabetes Complications, 2005;19(3):178–81.
  11. Ceriello A, Esposito K, Piconi L, et al., Oscillating glucose is more deleterious to endothelial function and oxidative stress than mean glucose in normal and type 2 diabetic patients, Diabetes, 2008;57(5):1349–54.
  12. Zhong Y, Ahang XY, Miao Y, et al., The relationship between glucose excursion and cognitive function in aged type 2 diabetes patients, Biomed Environ Sci, 2012;25(1):1–7.
  13. Rizzo MR, Marfella R, Barbieri M, et al., Relationships between daily acute glucose fluctuations and cognitive performance among aged type 2 diabetic patients, Diabetes Care, 2010;33(10):2169–74.
  14. Gimeno-Orna JA, Castro-Alonso FJ, Boned-Juliani B, Lou-Arnal LM, Fasting plasma glucose variability as a risk factor of retinopathy in Type 2 diabetic patients, J Diabetes Complications, 2003;17(2):78–81.
  15. Su G, Mi S, Tao H, et al., Association of glycemic variability and the presence and severity of coronary artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes, Cardiovascular Diabetol, 2011;10:19.

Further Resources

Share this Article
Related Content In Diabetes
  • Copied to clipboard!
    accredited arrow-downarrow_leftarrow-right-bluearrow-right-dark-bluearrow-right-greyarrow-right-orangearrow-right-whitearrow-right-bluearrow-up-orangeavatarcalendarchevron-down consultant-pathologist-nurseconsultant-pathologistcrosscrossdownloademailexclaimationfeedbackfiltergraph-arrowinterviewslinkmdt_iconmenumore_dots nurse-consultantpadlock patient-advocate-pathologistpatient-consultantpatientperson pharmacist-nurseplay_buttonplay-colour-tmcplay-colourAsset 1podcastprinter scenerysearch share single-doctor social_facebooksocial_googleplussocial_instagramsocial_linkedin_altsocial_linkedin_altsocial_pinterestlogo-twitter-glyph-32social_youtubeshape-star (1)tick-bluetick-orangetick-whiteticktimetranscriptup-arrowwebinar Department Location NEW TMM Corporate Services Icons-07NEW TMM Corporate Services Icons-08NEW TMM Corporate Services Icons-09NEW TMM Corporate Services Icons-10NEW TMM Corporate Services Icons-11NEW TMM Corporate Services Icons-12Salary £ TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-01TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-02TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-03TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-04TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-05TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-06TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-07TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-08TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-09TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-10TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-11TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-12TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-13TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-14TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-15TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-16TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-17TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-18TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-19TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-20TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-21TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-22TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-23TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-24TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-25TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-26TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-27TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-28TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-29TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-30TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-31TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-32TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-33TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-34TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-35TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-36TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-37TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-38TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-39TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-40TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-41TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-42TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-43TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-44TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-45TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-46TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-47TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-48TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-49TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-50TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-51TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-52TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-53TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-54TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-55TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-56TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-57TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-58TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-59TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-60TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-61TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-62TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-63TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-64TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-65TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-66TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-67TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-68TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-69TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-70TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-71TMM-Corp-Site-Icons-72