Email this article COMPARISON OF THE RESULTS OF BLOOD GLUCOSE SELFMONITORING AND CONTINUOUS GLUCOSE MONITORING IN PREGNANT WOMEN WITH PREVIOUS DIABETES MELLITUS
- Authors: Dreval' A.V.1, Shestakova T.P.1, Turkay M.2, Dreval' O.A.1, Kulikov D.A.1, Medvedev O.S.3
-
Affiliations:
- Moscow Regional Research and Clinical Institute (MONIKI)
- Koc University, Istanbul
- Lomonosov Moscow State University
- Issue: No 43 (2015)
- Pages: 66-71
- Section: ARTICLES
- URL: https://almclinmed.ru/jour/article/view/106
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.18786/2072-0505-2015-43-66-71
- ID: 106
Cite item
Full Text
Abstract
Background: Pregnancy is one of the indications for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The data on its efficiency in pregnant women are contradictory.
Aim: To compare the results of blood glucose self-monitoring (SMBG) and CGM in pregnant women with previous diabetes mellitus.
Materials and methods: We performed a cross-sectional comparative study of glycemia in 18 pregnant women with previous type 1 (87.8% of patients) and type 2 diabetes (22.2% of patients) with various degrees of glycemic control. Their age was 27.7 ± 4.9 year. At study entry, the patients were at 17.2 ± 6.1 weeks of gestation. CGM and SMBG were performed in and by all patients for the duration of 5.4 ± 1.5 days. Depending on their HbA1c levels, all patients were divided into two groups: group 1 – 12 women with the HbA1c above the target (8.5 ± 1%), and group 2 – 6 women with the HbA1c levels within the target (5.6 ± 0.3%).
Results: According to SMBG results, women from group 2 had above-the-target glycemia levels before breakfast, at 1 hour after breakfast and at bedtime: 6.2 ± 1.6, 8.7 ± 2.1, and 5.7 ± 1.9 mmol/L, respectively. According to CGM, patients from group 1 had higher postprandial glycemia than those from group 2 (8.0 ± 2.1 and 6.9 ± 1.8 mmol/L, respectively, p = 0.03). The analysis of glycemia during the day time revealed significant difference between the groups only at 1 hour after dinner (7.1 ± 1.4 mmol/L in group 1 and 5.8 ± 0.9 mmol/L in group 2, р = 0.041) and the difference was close to significant before lunch (6.0 ± 2.2 mmol/L in group 1 and 4.8 ± 1.0 mmol/L in group 2, р = 0.053). Comparison of SMBG and CGM results demonstrated significant difference only at one timepoint (at 1 hour after lunch) and only in group 1: median glycemia was 7.4 [6.9; 8.1] mmol/L by SMBG and 6 [5.4; 6.6] mmol/L by CGM measurement (р = 0.001). Lower median values by CGM measurement could be explained by averaging of three successive measurements carried out in the period of rapid changes of glycemia.
Conclusion: The achievement of control of diabetes by HbA1c doesn't necessarily reflect current achievement of the target glycemic levels. As long as there was no significant difference in glycemia measured by SMBG and CGM, we conclude that CGM doesn't have any advantage over routine frequent SMBG in pregnant women.
About the authors
A. V. Dreval'
Moscow Regional Research and Clinical Institute (MONIKI)
Email: t240169@yandex.ru
Dreval' Aleksandr V. – MD, PhD, Professor, Head of Department of Therapeutic Endocrinology; Chief of Chair of Endocrinology, Postgraduate Training Faculty Russian Federation
T. P. Shestakova
Moscow Regional Research and Clinical Institute (MONIKI)
Author for correspondence.
Email: t240169@yandex.ru
Shestakova Tat'yana P. – PhD, Associate Professor, Chair of Endocrinology, Postgraduate Training Faculty
* 61/2–9 Shchepkina ul., Moscow, 129110, Russian Federation. Tel.: +7 (495) 688 74 92. E-mail: t240169@yandex.ru
Russian FederationM. Turkay
Koc University, Istanbul
Email: fake@neicon.ru
Turkay Metin – Professor Turkey
O. A. Dreval'
Moscow Regional Research and Clinical Institute (MONIKI)
Email: t240169@yandex.ru
Dreval' Oleg A. – PhD, Research Fellow, Department of Therapeutic Endocrinology �ринологии Russian Federation
D. A. Kulikov
Moscow Regional Research and Clinical Institute (MONIKI)
Email: t240169@yandex.ru
Kulikov Dmitriy A. – PhD, Scientific Secretary Russian Federation
O. S. Medvedev
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Email: t240169@yandex.ru
Medvedev Oleg S. – MD, PhD, Professor, Head of Chair of Pharmacology Russian Federation
References
- Castorino K, Jovanovič L. Pregnancy and diabetes management: advances and controversies. Clin Chem. 2011;57(2):221–30. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2010.155382.
- Дедов ИИ, Шестакова МВ, Галстян ГР, Григорян ОР, Есаян РМ, Калашников ВЮ, Кураева ТЛ, Липатов ДВ, Майоров АЮ, Петеркова ВА, Смирнова ОМ, Старостина ЕГ, Суркова ЕВ, Сухарева ОЮ, Токмакова АЮ, Шамхалова МШ, Ярек-Мартынова ИР. Алгоритмы специализированной медицинской помощи больным сахарным диабетом. 7-й выпуск. Сахарный диабет. 2015;18(1S): 72–5.
- Hernandez TL, Barbour LA. A standard approach to continuous glucose monitor data in pregnancy for the study of fetal growth and infant outcomes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013;15(2):172–9. doi: 10.1089/dia.2012.0223.
- Murphy HR, Rayman G, Lewis K, Kelly S, Johal B, Duffield K, Fowler D, Campbell PJ, Temple RC. Effectiveness of continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant women with diabetes: randomised clinical trial. BMJ. 2008;337:a1680. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1680.
- Moy FM, Ray A, Buckley BS. Techniques of monitoring blood glucose during pregnancy for women with pre-existing diabetes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;4:CD009613. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009613.pub2.
- Dalfra MG, Chilelli NC, Di Cianni G, Mello G, Lencioni C, Biagioni S, Scalese M, Sartore G, Lapolla A. Glucose fluctuations during gestation: an additional tool for monitoring pregnancy complicated by diabetes. Int J Endocrinol. 2013;2013:279021. doi: 10.1155/2013/279021.
- Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes–2015. Diabetes Care. 2015;38(Suppl 1):S77–9. doi: 10.2337/dc15-S015.
- Древаль А, Древаль О, Ковалева Ю. Непрерывное мониторирование гликемии в оценке эффективности лечения СД. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing; 2015. 116 c.
Supplementary files
