4.5.0.0 In­ter­mit­tent­ly Scanned Con­tin­u­ous Glu­cose Mon­i­tor Use

Rec­om­men­da­tion

7.19 In­ter­mit­tent­ly scanned con­tin­u­ous glu­cose mon­i­tor use may be con­sid­ered as a sub­sti­tute for self-‍mon­i­tor­ing of blood glu­cose in adults with di­a­betes re­quir­ing fre­quent glu­cose test­ing. C

isCGM (some­times re­ferred to as “flash” CGM) is a CGM that mea­sures glu­cose in in­ter­sti­tial fluid through a <0.4 mm– thick filament that is in­sert­ed under the skin. It has been avail­able in Eu­rope since 2014 and was ap­proved by the FDA for use in adults in the U.S. in 2017. The per­son­al ver­sion of isCGM has a re­ceiver that, after scan­ning over the sen­sor by the in­di­vid­u­al, dis­plays real-‍time glu­cose val­ues and glu­cose trend ar­rows. The data can be up­load­ed and a re­port cre­at­ed using avail­able soft­ware. In the pro­fes­sion­al ver­sion, the pa­tient does not carry a re­ceiver; the data are blind­ed to the pa­tient and the de­vice is down­load­ed in the di­a­betes care pro­vider’s office using the pro­vider’s re­ceiver and the soft­ware. The isCGM sen­sor is small­er than those of other sys­tems and is water re­sis­tant. In the U.S., the FDA now re­quires a 1-h start-‍up time after ac­ti­va­tion of the sys­tem, and it can be worn up to 14 days. The isCGM does not re­quire cal­i­bra­tion with SMBG be­cause it is fac­to­ry cal­i­brat­ed. Ac­etaminophen does not cause in­ter­fer­ence with glu­cose read­ings. The mean ab­so­lute rel­a­tive dif­fer­ence re­ported by the man­u­fac­tur­er is 9.4%. It mea­sures glu­cose every minute, records mea­surements every 15 min, and dis­plays up to 8 h of data. As op­posed to real-‍time CGM sys­tems, isCGM has no alarms. The di­rect costs of isCGM are lower than those of re­al­time CGM sys­tems. In gen­er­al, both the con­sumer and pro­fes­sion­al ver­sions are cov­ered by most com­mer­cial in­sur­ance car­ri­ers and el­i­gi­ble Medi­care pro­grams. Informa­tion on Med­i­caid cov­er­age was not avail­able at the time of this writ­ing.

Stud­ies in adults with di­a­betes in­di­cate isCGM has ac­cept­able ac­cu­ra­cy when com­pared with SMBG (99–102), al­though the ac­cu­ra­cy may be lower at high and/‍or low glu­cose lev­els (103,104). Stud­ies com­par­ing the ac­cu­ra­cy of isCGM with real-‍time CGM show conflict­ing re­sults (102,104,,105). isCGM may de­crease the risk of hy­po­glycemia in in­di­vid­u­als with type 1 (85) or type 2 di­a­betes (94). There are a grow­ing num­ber of stud­ies sug­gest­ing sim­i­lar good per­for­mance and po­ten­tial for benefit in spe­cial pop­u­la­tions, in­clud­ing preg­nant women with di­a­betes (106), in­di­vid­u­als with type 1 di­a­betes and hy­po­glycemia un­aware­ness(107), and chil­dren (108–110), al­though ac­cu­ra­cy (mean ab­so­lute rel­a­tive dif­fer­ence) could be de­creased in younger chil­dren (109). Con­tact der­mati­tis has been re­ported and linked to the pres­ence of isobornyl acry­late, a struc­tural plas­tic of the de­vice, which is a skin sen­si­tiz­er and can cause an ad­di­tion­al spread­ing al­ler­gic reac­tion (111–113).

There are sev­er­al pub­lished re­views of data avail­able on isCGM (114–116). The Nor­we­gian In­sti­tute for Pub­lic Health con­duct­ed an as­sess­ment of isCGM clin­i­cal ef­fec­tive­ness, cost-‍ef­fec­tive­ness, and safe­ty for in­di­vid­u­als with type 1 and type 2 di­a­betes, based on data avail­able until Jan­uary 2017 (114). The au­thors con­clud­ed that, al­though there were few qual­i­ty data avail­able at the time of the re­port, isCGM may in­crease treat­ment sat­is­fac­tion, in­crease time in range, and re­duce fre­quen­cy of noc­tur­nal hy­po­glycemia, with­out dif­fer­ences in A1C or qual­i­ty of life or se­ri­ous ad­verse events. The Cana­di­an Agen­cy for Drugs and Tech­nolo­gies in Health re­viewed ex­ist­ing data on isCGM per­for­mance and ac­cu­ra­cy, hy­po­glycemia, ef­fect on A1C, and pa­tient sat­is­fac­tion and qual­i­ty of life and con­clud­ed that the sys­tem could re­place SMBG in par­tic­u­lar in pa­tients who re­quire fre­quent test­ing (115). The last re­view pub­lished at the time of this re­port (116) also sup­ported the use of isCGM as a more af­ford­able al­ter­na­tive to real-‍time CGM sys­tems for in­di­vid­u­als with di­a­betes who are on in­ten­sive in­sulin ther­a­py.