Evaluation of Hypoglycemia in Type 2 Diabetic Patients with Well-Controlled Glucose Levels by Continuous Glucose Monitoring System
Jing Ma,Cuixia Tan,Li Zhong,Dawei Chen,Chun Wang,Guanjian Liu,Xingwu Ran
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.issn.1674-5809.2017.07.006
2017-01-01
Abstract:Objective To investigate the incidence of hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetic patients with well-controlled glucose levels (HbA1c<7.0%) by using a continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS), and evaluate the clinical application value of CGMS. Methods A total of 102 type 2 diabetic patients with HbA1c<7.0% were recruited in Xindu District and Longquanyi District of Chengdu between January 2016 and January 2017. Each subject received a continuous glucose monitoring for 3 consecutive days and was instructed to self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) with finger-stick blood glucose 4 times per day. The accuracies of CGMS and SMBG were analyzed by Clarke error grid analysis. The demographic and laboratory data were collected to analyze the incidence of hypoglycemia and its risk factors. The control targets of glucose fluctuation were explored by using receiver operating characteristic curve for avoiding hypoglycemia. T test was used for analyzing measurement data and chi-square test for count data. Results (1) Of 102 subjects, 49 patients experienced hypoglycemia including 31 cases with nocturnal hypoglycemia. The mean blood glucose (MBG) was (6.9 ± 1.1) mmol/L and the standard deviation of blood glucose (SDBG) was (1.4 ± 0.7) mmol/L. (2) Taking out 946 pairs of matched glucose measurements from SMBG and CGMS, Clarke error grid analysis showed that 99.05%of the readings from CGMS fell into the clinical acceptable zone A (clinical exactness) and zone B (benign error), further findings presented that 82.05%of the readings from CGMS fell into zone A and zone B when exploring hypoglycemia consistence. (3) MBG, SDBG, continuous overlapping net glycemic action (CONGA), low blood glucose index (LBGI), mean of daily differences (MODD), mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE), M-value and largest amplitude of glycemic excursion (LAGE) had significant differences between the hypoglycemia and non-hypoglycemia group (t=1.807-33.957, all P<0.05). (4) Forty-nine patients experienced 140 events with a glucose level<3.9 mmol/L recorded in CGMS. The incidence of hypoglycemia presented highest from 22:00pm to 6:00am (45.00%). The duration time of single hypoglycemia event was 35 (P2525.00,P7545.00) min. (5) Episodes of hypoglycemia and LBGI significantly correlated with professional status (r=-0.249,-0.202, P<0.05, respectively) and monthly income (r=-0.295,-0.254, P<0.05, respectively). Logistic regression analysis indicated that LBGI was independently correlated with hypoglycemia (r=2.618, OR=13.712, P<0.05). (6) Control targets analyzed by ROC curve for avoiding hypoglycemic events were MBG<6.93 mmol/L, SDBG<1.38 mmol/L, LBGI<0.84 mmol/L and MODD<1.44 mmol/L, respectively. Conclusions Hypoglycemia presents high in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with good glycemic control. CGMS has good accuracy and can monitor hypoglycemia which is not easily to be detected by SMBG. It can be used to provide a more reasonable treatment plan for type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.