Differences Between Glycated Hemoglobin and Glucose Management Indicator in Real-Time and Intermittent Scanning Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Adults With Type 1 Diabetes

Author:

Yoo Jee Hee12,Moon Sun Joon3,Park Cheol-Young3,Kim Jae Hyeon4ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Chung-Ang University Gwangmyeong Hospital, Chung-Ang University College of Medicine, Gwangmyeong, Republic of Korea

2. Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine, Wonju, Republic of Korea

3. Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

4. Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Department of Internal Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea

Abstract

Background: This study demonstrates the difference between glucose management indicator (GMI) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) according to sensor mean glucose and HbA1c status using 2 continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) sensors in people with type 1 diabetes. Methods: A total of 275 subjects (117 Dexcom G6 [G6] and 158 FreeStyle Libre 1 [FL]) with type 1 diabetes was included. The G6 and FL sensors were used, respectively, over 90 days to analyze 682 and 515 glycemic profiles that coincide with HbA1c. Results: The mean HbA1c was 6.6% in Dexcom G6 and 7.2% in FL profiles. In G6 profiles, GMI was significantly higher than HbA1c irrespective of mean glucose (all P < .001, mean difference: 0.58% ± 0.49%). The GMI was significantly higher than the given HbA1c when HbA1c was below 8.0% (all P < .001). The discordance was the highest at 0.9% for lower HbA1c values (5.0%-5.9%). The proportion of discordance >0.5% improved from 60.1% to 30.9% when using the revised GMI equation in G6 profiles. In FL profile, the overall mean difference between GMI and HbA1c was 0 ( P = .966). The GMI was significantly lower by 0.9% than HbA1c of 9.0% to 9.9% and higher by 0.5% in HbA1c of 5.0% to 5.9% (all P < .001). Conclusions: The GMI is overestimated in G6 users, particularly those with well-controlled diabetes, but the GMI and HbA1c discordance improved with a revised equation from the observed data. The FL profile showed greater discordance for lower HbA1c levels or higher HbA1c levels.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3