Can the Use of Continuous Glucose Monitoring Improve Glycemic Control in Patients with Type 1 and 2 Diabetes Receiving Dialysis?

Abstract

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) is an unreliable glycemic marker in the dialysis population, and alternative methods of glycemic monitoring should be considered. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) measures interstitial glucose, an indirect measure of plasma glucose, and allows for estimating mean sensor glucose, glucose variability, and time in ranges. Thus, CGM provides a more nuanced picture of glycemic variables than HbA1c, which only informs about average glucose and not variation in glucose or hypoglycemia. <b><i>Summary:</i></b> In non-dialysis patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, CGM metrics are increasingly used to estimate glycemic control and are associated with improvements in glucose levels. Although a clear link has not yet been established between some CGM variables and the development of late diabetic complications, CGM use could be an important step forward in improving glycemic control in patients receiving dialysis. The ability to detect and prevent hypoglycemia while optimizing glucose levels could be particularly valuable. However, long-term CGM use has not been evaluated in the dialysis population, and the practical burden and cost associated with CGM use may be a limitation. We discuss the strengths and limitations of using CGM in the dialysis population with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. <b><i>Key Messages:</i></b>CGM circumvents the pitfalls of HbA1c in dialysis patients and provides detailed measures of the mean sensor glucose, glucose variability, and time in ranges. Guidelines recommend a minimum of 50% time spent in the target range (3.9–10.0 mmol/L) and less than 1% below range (&#x3c;3.9 mmol/L) for patients receiving dialysis but remain to be evaluated in the dialysis population. CGM can be a valuable tool in reducing overall glucose levels and variations while detecting hypoglycemia, but the practical burden of CGM use and cost may be a limitation.