Cargando…

Effect of divergent continuous glucose monitoring technologies on glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials

AIMS: We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) assessing separately and together the effect of the three distinct categories of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems (adjunctive, non‐adjunctive and intermittently‐scanned CGM [isC...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Elbalshy, Mona, Haszard, Jillian, Smith, Hazel, Kuroko, Sarahmarie, Galland, Barbara, Oliver, Nick, Shah, Viral, de Bock, Martin I., Wheeler, Benjamin J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9542260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35441743
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dme.14854
_version_ 1784804110652932096
author Elbalshy, Mona
Haszard, Jillian
Smith, Hazel
Kuroko, Sarahmarie
Galland, Barbara
Oliver, Nick
Shah, Viral
de Bock, Martin I.
Wheeler, Benjamin J.
author_facet Elbalshy, Mona
Haszard, Jillian
Smith, Hazel
Kuroko, Sarahmarie
Galland, Barbara
Oliver, Nick
Shah, Viral
de Bock, Martin I.
Wheeler, Benjamin J.
author_sort Elbalshy, Mona
collection PubMed
description AIMS: We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) assessing separately and together the effect of the three distinct categories of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems (adjunctive, non‐adjunctive and intermittently‐scanned CGM [isCGM]), compared with traditional capillary glucose monitoring, on HbA1c and CGM metrics. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Central register of clinical trials were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: randomised controlled trials; participants with type 1 diabetes of any age and insulin regimen; investigating CGM and isCGM compared with traditional capillary glucose monitoring; and reporting glycaemic outcomes of HbA1c and/or time‐in‐range (TIR). Glycaemic outcomes were extracted post‐intervention and expressed as mean differences and 95%CIs between treatment and comparator groups. Results were pooled using a random‐effects meta‐analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Rob2 tool. RESULTS: This systematic review was conducted between January and April 2021; it included 22 RCTs (15 adjunctive, 5 non‐adjunctive, and 2 isCGM)). The overall analysis of the pooled three categories showed a statistically significant absolute improvement in HbA1c percentage points (mean difference (95% CI): −0.22% [−0.31 to −0.14], I (2) = 79%) for intervention compared with comparator and was strongest for adjunctive CGM (−0.26% [−0.36, −0.16]). Overall TIR (absolute change) increased by 5.4% (3.5 to 7.2), I (2 )= 71% for CGM intervention compared with comparator and was strongest with non‐adjunctive CGM (6.0% [2.3, 9.7]). CONCLUSIONS: For individuals with T1D, use of CGM was beneficial for impacting glycaemic outcomes including HbA1c, TIR and time‐below‐range (TBR). Glycaemic improvement appeared greater for TIR for newer non‐adjunctive CGM technology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9542260
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95422602022-10-14 Effect of divergent continuous glucose monitoring technologies on glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials Elbalshy, Mona Haszard, Jillian Smith, Hazel Kuroko, Sarahmarie Galland, Barbara Oliver, Nick Shah, Viral de Bock, Martin I. Wheeler, Benjamin J. Diabet Med Systematic Review or Meta‐analysis AIMS: We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) assessing separately and together the effect of the three distinct categories of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems (adjunctive, non‐adjunctive and intermittently‐scanned CGM [isCGM]), compared with traditional capillary glucose monitoring, on HbA1c and CGM metrics. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Central register of clinical trials were searched. Inclusion criteria were as follows: randomised controlled trials; participants with type 1 diabetes of any age and insulin regimen; investigating CGM and isCGM compared with traditional capillary glucose monitoring; and reporting glycaemic outcomes of HbA1c and/or time‐in‐range (TIR). Glycaemic outcomes were extracted post‐intervention and expressed as mean differences and 95%CIs between treatment and comparator groups. Results were pooled using a random‐effects meta‐analysis. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Rob2 tool. RESULTS: This systematic review was conducted between January and April 2021; it included 22 RCTs (15 adjunctive, 5 non‐adjunctive, and 2 isCGM)). The overall analysis of the pooled three categories showed a statistically significant absolute improvement in HbA1c percentage points (mean difference (95% CI): −0.22% [−0.31 to −0.14], I (2) = 79%) for intervention compared with comparator and was strongest for adjunctive CGM (−0.26% [−0.36, −0.16]). Overall TIR (absolute change) increased by 5.4% (3.5 to 7.2), I (2 )= 71% for CGM intervention compared with comparator and was strongest with non‐adjunctive CGM (6.0% [2.3, 9.7]). CONCLUSIONS: For individuals with T1D, use of CGM was beneficial for impacting glycaemic outcomes including HbA1c, TIR and time‐below‐range (TBR). Glycaemic improvement appeared greater for TIR for newer non‐adjunctive CGM technology. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-25 2022-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9542260/ /pubmed/35441743 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dme.14854 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Diabetes UK https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Systematic Review or Meta‐analysis
Elbalshy, Mona
Haszard, Jillian
Smith, Hazel
Kuroko, Sarahmarie
Galland, Barbara
Oliver, Nick
Shah, Viral
de Bock, Martin I.
Wheeler, Benjamin J.
Effect of divergent continuous glucose monitoring technologies on glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials
title Effect of divergent continuous glucose monitoring technologies on glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_full Effect of divergent continuous glucose monitoring technologies on glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_fullStr Effect of divergent continuous glucose monitoring technologies on glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Effect of divergent continuous glucose monitoring technologies on glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_short Effect of divergent continuous glucose monitoring technologies on glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_sort effect of divergent continuous glucose monitoring technologies on glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials
topic Systematic Review or Meta‐analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9542260/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35441743
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dme.14854
work_keys_str_mv AT elbalshymona effectofdivergentcontinuousglucosemonitoringtechnologiesonglycaemiccontrolintype1diabetesmellitusasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT haszardjillian effectofdivergentcontinuousglucosemonitoringtechnologiesonglycaemiccontrolintype1diabetesmellitusasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT smithhazel effectofdivergentcontinuousglucosemonitoringtechnologiesonglycaemiccontrolintype1diabetesmellitusasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT kurokosarahmarie effectofdivergentcontinuousglucosemonitoringtechnologiesonglycaemiccontrolintype1diabetesmellitusasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT gallandbarbara effectofdivergentcontinuousglucosemonitoringtechnologiesonglycaemiccontrolintype1diabetesmellitusasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT olivernick effectofdivergentcontinuousglucosemonitoringtechnologiesonglycaemiccontrolintype1diabetesmellitusasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT shahviral effectofdivergentcontinuousglucosemonitoringtechnologiesonglycaemiccontrolintype1diabetesmellitusasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT debockmartini effectofdivergentcontinuousglucosemonitoringtechnologiesonglycaemiccontrolintype1diabetesmellitusasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT wheelerbenjaminj effectofdivergentcontinuousglucosemonitoringtechnologiesonglycaemiccontrolintype1diabetesmellitusasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials