The food and drug administration is now preparing to establish tighter performance requirements for blood glucose monitors

Society of Critical Care Medicine Guidelines on Glycemic Control for Critically Ill Children and Adults 2024

RATIONALE

Maintaining glycemic control of critically ill patients may impact outcomes such as survival, infection, and neuromuscular recovery, but there is equipoise on the target blood levels, monitoring frequency, and methods.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose was to update the 2012 Society of Critical Care Medicine and American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) guidelines with a new systematic review of the literature and provide actionable guidance for clinicians.

PANEL DESIGN

The total multiprofessional task force of 22, consisting of clinicians and patient/family advocates, and a methodologist applied the processes described in the ACCM guidelines standard operating procedure manual to develop evidence-based recommendations in alignment with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Approach (GRADE) methodology. Conflict of interest policies were strictly followed in all phases of the guidelines, including panel selection and voting.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcomes question related to glycemic management in critically ill children (≥ 42 wk old adjusted gestational age to 18 yr old) and adults, including triggers for initiation of insulin therapy, route of administration, monitoring frequency, role of an explicit decision support tool for protocol maintenance, and methodology for glucose testing. We identified the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak or as a good practice statement. In addition, "In our practice" statements were included when the available evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation, but the panel felt that describing their practice patterns may be appropriate. Additional topics were identified for future research.

RESULTS

This guideline is an update of the guidelines for the use of an insulin infusion for the management of hyperglycemia in critically ill patients. It is intended for adult and pediatric practitioners to reassess current practices and direct research into areas with inadequate literature. The panel issued seven statements related to glycemic control in unselected adults (two good practice statements, four conditional recommendations, one research statement) and seven statements for pediatric patients (two good practice statements, one strong recommendation, one conditional recommendation, two "In our practice" statements, and one research statement), with additional detail on specific subset populations where available.

CONCLUSIONS

The guidelines panel achieved consensus for adults and children regarding a preference for an insulin infusion for the acute management of hyperglycemia with titration guided by an explicit clinical decision support tool and frequent (≤ 1 hr) monitoring intervals during glycemic instability to minimize hypoglycemia and against targeting intensive glucose levels. These recommendations are intended for consideration within the framework of the patient's existing clinical status. Further research is required to evaluate the role of individualized glycemic targets, continuous glucose monitoring systems, explicit decision support tools, and standardized glycemic control metrics.

Seven-Year Surveillance of the Clinical Performance of a Blood Glucose Test Strip Product

BACKGROUND

A key approach in enabling people with diabetes to better manage their condition is through self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). Any functional SMBG system should demonstrate clinical accuracy across a broad glucose range and be insensitive to hematocrit. Furthermore, it should be incumbent on the manufacturer to demonstrate that their product continues to meet clinical accuracy claims during product lifetime.

METHODS

Test strips from a globally distributed SMBG product were sampled from randomly selected production batches as part of the manufacturer's routine product evaluation process. Clinical accuracy was assessed within diabetes patients at 3 clinic sites against a standard reference method and evaluated against system accuracy in accordance with the ISO 15197:2015 standard (unchanged from ISO 15197:2013 in terms of performance specifications). Data were collected over 7 years (2010-2016) and comprised 73,600 individual glucose results. Overall clinic performance was assessed, as was accuracy at low and high glucose levels and extremes of hematocrit.

RESULTS

Across the 7-year surveillance period, overall test strip clinical accuracy was 97.8% versus the 95% ISO-defined minimum criterion with by-year values of 97.0-98.6%. Accuracy at the lowest (≤50 mg/dL) and highest (>400 mg/dL) ranges of glucose was 97.0% and 98.3% respectively. Within these low/high blood glucose subpopulations, accuracy at the lower and upper first percentile hematocrit ranges, was 98.9%, and 97.1% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This 7-year surveillance program showed the test strips to have excellent clinical accuracy at the outer ranges of subject blood glucose and hematocrit, based on assessment against the ISO 15197:2015 clinical accuracy criterion.

Performance of Cleared Blood Glucose Monitors

Cleared blood glucose monitor (BGM) systems do not always perform as accurately for users as they did to become cleared. We performed a literature review of recent publications between 2010 and 2014 that present data about the frequency of inaccurate performance using ISO 15197 2003 and ISO 15197 2013 as target standards. We performed an additional literature review of publications that present data about the clinical and economic risks of inaccurate BGMs for making treatment decisions or calibrating continuous glucose monitors (CGMs). We found 11 publications describing performance of 98 unique BGM systems. 53 of these 98 (54%) systems met ISO 15197 2003 and 31 of the 98 (32%) tested systems met ISO 15197 2013 analytical accuracy standards in all studies in which they were evaluated. Of the tested systems, 33 were identified by us as FDA-cleared. Among these FDA-cleared BGM systems, 24 out of 32 (75%) met ISO 15197 2003 and 15 out of 31 (48.3%) met ISO 15197 2013 in all studies in which they were evaluated. Among the non-FDA-cleared BGM systems, 29 of 65 (45%) met ISO 15197 2003 and 15 out of 65 (23%) met ISO 15197 2013 in all studies in which they were evaluated. It is more likely that an FDA-cleared BGM system, compared to a non-FDA-cleared BGM system, will perform according to ISO 15197 2003 (χ(2) = 6.2, df = 3, P = 0.04) and ISO 15197 2013 (χ(2) = 11.4, df = 3, P = 0.003). We identified 7 articles about clinical risks and 3 articles about economic risks of inaccurate BGMs. We conclude that a significant proportion of cleared BGMs do not perform at the level for which they were cleared or according to international standards of accuracy. Such poor performance leads to adverse clinical and economic consequences.

Why Have So Many Intravascular Glucose Monitoring Devices Failed?

Secondary to the inherent limitations of both point-of-care and central laboratory glucose technologies, continuous glucose measurement has recently enjoyed a high level of investment. Because of the perceived advantages by some of measuring in the intravascular space compared to the subcutaneous tissue, a number of technologies have been developed. In this review, we evaluate nine systems that have shown promise, although only one of these has been cleared for sale in the United States. The detection methodology, regulatory status, technical issues, and company circumstance surrounding each technology are examined.

Challenges of inpatient blood glucose monitoring: standards, methods, and devices to measure blood glucose

Glucose control in the hospital setting is very important. There is a high incidence of hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and glycemic variability in hospitalized patients. Safe insulin delivery and glucose control is dependent on reliable glucose meters and monitoring systems in the hospital. Different glucose monitoring systems use arterial, venous, central venous, and capillary blood samples. It is important for clinicians to be aware that there are limitations of specific point-of-care (POC) glucose meters and that situations exist whereby POC glucose meters as the sole measurement device should be avoided. POC meter devices are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration for use in critical care, although POC meter devices are commonly used in critical care settings and elsewhere. This review focuses on glucose assay principles, instrument technology, influences on glucose measurement, standards for glucose measurement, and an evaluation of different methods to measure blood glucose in the hospital setting.

The surveillance error grid

Currently used error grids for assessing clinical accuracy of blood glucose monitors are based on out-of-date medical practices. Error grids have not been widely embraced by regulatory agencies for clearance of monitors, but this type of tool could be useful for surveillance of the performance of cleared products. Diabetes Technology Society together with representatives from the Food and Drug Administration, the American Diabetes Association, the Endocrine Society, and the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, and representatives of academia, industry, and government, have developed a new error grid, called the surveillance error grid (SEG) as a tool to assess the degree of clinical risk from inaccurate blood glucose (BG) monitors. A total of 206 diabetes clinicians were surveyed about the clinical risk of errors of measured BG levels by a monitor. The impact of such errors on 4 patient scenarios was surveyed. Each monitor/reference data pair was scored and color-coded on a graph per its average risk rating. Using modeled data representative of the accuracy of contemporary meters, the relationships between clinical risk and monitor error were calculated for the Clarke error grid (CEG), Parkes error grid (PEG), and SEG. SEG action boundaries were consistent across scenarios, regardless of whether the patient was type 1 or type 2 or using insulin or not. No significant differences were noted between responses of adult/pediatric or 4 types of clinicians. Although small specific differences in risk boundaries between US and non-US clinicians were noted, the panel felt they did not justify separate grids for these 2 types of clinicians. The data points of the SEG were classified in 15 zones according to their assigned level of risk, which allowed for comparisons with the classic CEG and PEG. Modeled glucose monitor data with realistic self-monitoring of blood glucose errors derived from meter testing experiments plotted on the SEG when compared to the data plotted on the CEG and PEG produced risk estimates that were more granular and reflective of a continuously increasing risk scale. The SEG is a modern metric for clinical risk assessments of BG monitor errors that assigns a unique risk score to each monitor data point when compared to a reference value. The SEG allows the clinical accuracy of a BG monitor to be portrayed in many ways, including as the percentages of data points falling into custom-defined risk zones. For modeled data the SEG, compared with the CEG and PEG, allows greater precision for quantifying risk, especially when the risks are low. This tool will be useful to allow regulators and manufacturers to monitor and evaluate glucose monitor performance in their surveillance programs.

Analytical performance of glucose monitoring systems at different blood glucose ranges and analysis of outliers in a clinical setting

We investigated the analytical accuracy of 27 glucose monitoring systems (GMS) in a clinical setting, using the new ISO accuracy limits. In addition to measuring accuracy at blood glucose (BG) levels < 100 mg/dl and > 100 mg/dl, we also analyzed devices performance with respect to these criteria at 5 specific BG level ranges, making it possible to further differentiate between devices with regard to overall performance. Carbohydrate meals and insulin injections were used to induce an increase or decrease in BG levels in 37 insulin-dependent patients. Capillary blood samples were collected at 10-minute intervals, and BG levels determined simultaneously using GMS and a laboratory-based method. Results obtained via both methods were analyzed according to the new ISO criteria. Only 12 of 27 devices tested met overall requirements of the new ISO accuracy limits. When accuracy was assessed at BG levels < 100 mg/dl and > 100 mg/dl, criteria were met by 14 and 13 devices, respectively. A more detailed analysis involving 5 different BG level ranges revealed that 13 (48.1%) devices met the required criteria at BG levels between 50 and 150 mg/dl, whereas 19 (70.3%) met these criteria at BG levels above 250 mg/dl. The overall frequency of outliers was low. The assessment of analytical accuracy of GMS at a number of BG level ranges made it possible to further differentiate between devices with regard to overall performance, a process that is of particular importance given the user-centered nature of the devices' intended use.

A new test strip technology platform for self-monitoring of blood glucose

In the management of diabetes, accuracy of devices used for self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is critical because SMBG results can affect patient diabetes-related health outcomes. A new blood glucose monitoring system (BGMS) platform has been developed that is based on the new CONTOUR® NEXT (CN) test strip. This BGMS platform uses a proprietary electron mediator and algorithm to minimize errors at different steps in the testing process, thus minimizing outliers and significantly improving accuracy from prior-generation blood glucose meter systems. As demonstrated by questionnaire results from clinical studies with the new BGMS platform, accuracy and ease of use are important considerations for people with diabetes and their health care professionals when selecting an SMBG device. This article provides an overview of laboratory studies and clinical trials in the hands of lay users involving the performance of the portfolio of blood glucose meters that uses the new test strip. Each BGMS in the platform, which includes the CONTOUR XT (CONTOUR NEXT EZ in the United States), CONTOUR NEXT LINK, CONTOUR NEXT USB, and CN systems, demonstrated advanced accuracy both in the laboratory and in the hands of subjects (people with diabetes) and trained health care professionals. All systems met and exceeded International Organization for Standardization accuracy criteria (both ISO 15197:2003 and ISO 15197:2013). Each system in the new BGMS platform delivers advanced accuracy, which is essential to people who utilize SMBG for improved management.

Overview of fluorescence glucose sensing: a technology with a bright future

Fluorescence represents a promising alternative technology to electrochemistry and spectroscopy for accurate analysis of glucose in diabetes; however, no implanted fluorescence glucose assay is currently commercially available. The method depends on the principle of fluorescence, which is the emission of light by a substance after absorbing light. A fluorophore is a molecule that will absorb energy of a specific wavelength and reemit energy at a different wavelength. A fluorescence glucose-sensing molecule can be constructed to increase or decrease in fluorescence from baseline according to the ambient concentration of glucose. A quantum dot is a semiconductor crystal that can serve as a sensor by fluorescing at a desired wavelength or color, depending on the crystal size and materials used. If receptor molecules for glucose can be adsorbed to single-wall carbon nanotubules, then the resulting binding of glucose to these receptors will alter the nanotubes' fluorescence. Fluorescence glucose sensors can provide a continuous glucose reading by being embedded into removable wire-shaped subcutaneous or intravenous catheters as well as other types of implanted structures, such as capsules, microcapsules, microbeads, nano-optodes, or capillary tubes. Fluorescence glucose-sensing methods, which are under development, offer four potential advantages over commercially used continuous glucose monitoring technologies: (1) greater sensitivity to low concentrations of glucose, (2) the possibility of constructing sensors that operate most accurately in the hypoglycemic range by using binding proteins with disassociation constants in this range, (3) less need to recalibrate in response to local tissue reactions around the sensor, and (4) no need to implant either a transmitter or a power source for wireless communication of glucose data. Fluorescence glucose sensors also have four significant disadvantages compared with commercially used continuous glucose monitoring technologies: (1) a damaging foreign body response; (2) a sensitivity to local pH and/or oxygen, which can affect the dye response; (3) potential toxicity of implanted dyes, especially if the implanted fluorophore cannot be fully removed; and (4) the necessity of always carrying a dedicated light source to interrogate the implanted sensor. Fluorescence sensing is a promising method for measuring glucose continuously, especially in the hypoglycemic range. If currently vexing technical and engineering and biocompatibility problems can be overcome, then this approach could lead to a new family of continuous glucose monitors.

Performance of a new blood glucose monitoring system in the hands of intended users

BACKGROUND

This study assessed the performance of a blood glucose monitoring system (BGMS) in development that uses a new generation of blood glucose test strips with capillary and venous blood in the hands of its intended users, people with diabetes and healthcare professionals (HCPs).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

In total, 93 subjects ≥ 18 years old (median age, 33 years) with type 1 (78%) or type 2 (22%) diabetes participated. Untrained subjects performed self-test fingersticks using a Microlet(®)2 lancing device (Bayer HealthCare LLC, Diabetes Care, Tarrytown, NY) followed by testing of their own capillary blood on the BGMS. HCPs performed fingersticks (using a Tenderlett(®) lancing device [International Technidyne Corp., Edison, NJ]) and venipunctures on subjects and tested both capillary and venous samples from subjects on the BGMS. All BGMS results were compared with Yellow Springs Instruments (YSI) (YSI Life Sciences, Inc., Yellow Springs, OH) laboratory results. Analytical accuracy was assessed according to International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15197:2003 guidelines (i.e., within ± 15 mg/dL or ± 20% of the YSI results for samples with glucose concentrations < 75 mg/dL and ≥ 75 mg/dL, respectively) and more stringent criteria (i.e., within ± 15 mg/dL or ± 15% of the YSI results for samples with glucose concentrations < 100 mg/dL and ≥ 100 mg/dL, respectively).

RESULTS

Overall, 98.9% (180/182) of subject Microlet2 capillary fingerstick results, 99.5% (182/183) of HCP Tenderlett capillary fingerstick results, and 100% (186/186) of venous results met current ISO criteria and more stringent criteria. The average hematocrit was 44%, with values ranging from 32% to 52%.

CONCLUSIONS

Test results from both capillary fingerstick and venous samples with a new BGMS in development met current accuracy guidelines as well as proposed tighter criteria.

A comprehensive evaluation of the performance of the test strip technology for OneTouch Verio glucose meter systems

BACKGROUND

OneTouch® Verio™ test strips (LifeScan Inc., Milpitas, CA) are designed to minimize error when used in blood glucose monitoring systems. These strips have a specialized architecture and incorporate a sophisticated waveform and proprietary algorithm.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Performance of OneTouch Verio test strips was assessed in the laboratory in the presence of a wide range of patient, environmental, and pharmacologic factors. A clinical evaluation was conducted in which 296 patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) performed glucose testing using OneTouch Verio test strips and OneTouch VerioIQ meters.

RESULTS

In the laboratory study, OneTouch Verio test strip results achieved a high level of performance over a wide range of hematocrit (19-61%), temperature (5-45(°)C), humidity (10-90% relative humidity), and altitude (0-3,048 m) conditions. Performance was not affected by 22 of 23 chemical compounds. In the clinical study, 100% (31/31) of lay-user test results were within ±10 mg/dL of reference values for blood glucose <75 mg/dL. At blood glucose ≥75 mg/dL, 99.2% (243/245) were within ±15% of reference values. A feature of the VerioIQ meter, PatternAlert(™) Technology, was correctly used and positively evaluated by >98% of lay users.

CONCLUSIONS

OneTouch Verio test strips are accurate and precise over a wide range of patient, environmental, and pharmacologic conditions. In addition, lay-users were able to successfully use the OneTouch VerioIQ PatternAlert Technology without HCP training.

Effects of simulated altitude on blood glucose meter performance: implications for in-flight blood glucose monitoring

BACKGROUND

Most manufacturers of blood glucose monitoring equipment do not give advice regarding the use of their meters and strips onboard aircraft, and some airlines have blood glucose testing equipment in the aircraft cabin medical bag. Previous studies using older blood glucose meters (BGMs) have shown conflicting results on the performance of both glucose oxidase (GOX)- and glucose dehydrogenase (GDH)-based meters at high altitude. The aim of our study was to evaluate the performance of four new-generation BGMs at sea level and at a simulated altitude equivalent to that used in the cabin of commercial aircrafts.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Blood glucose measurements obtained by two GDH and two GOX BGMs at sea level and simulated altitude of 8000 feet in a hypobaric chamber were compared with measurements obtained using a YSI 2300 blood glucose analyzer as a reference method. Spiked venous blood samples of three different glucose levels were used. The accuracy of each meter was determined by calculating percentage error of each meter compared with the YSI reference and was also assessed against standard International Organization for Standardization (ISO) criteria. Clinical accuracy was evaluated using the consensus error grid method. The percentage (standard deviation) error for GDH meters at sea level and altitude was 13.36% (8.83%; for meter 1) and 12.97% (8.03%; for meter 2) with p = .784, and for GOX meters was 5.88% (7.35%; for meter 3) and 7.38% (6.20%; for meter 4) with p = .187. There was variation in the number of time individual meters met the standard ISO criteria ranging from 72-100%. Results from all four meters at both sea level and simulated altitude fell within zones A and B of the consensus error grid, using YSI as the reference.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, at simulated altitude, no differences were observed between the performance of GDH and GOX meters. Overestimation of blood glucose concentration was seen among individual meters evaluated, but none of the results obtained would have resulted in dangerous failure to detect and treat blood glucose errors or in giving treatment that was actually contradictory to that required.

Tighter accuracy standards within point-of-care blood glucose monitoring: how six commonly used systems compare

INTRODUCTION

Blood glucose monitoring systems (BGMS) are used in the hospital environment to manage blood glucose levels in patients at the bedside. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15197:2003 standard is currently used by regulatory bodies as a minimum requirement for the performance of BGMS, specific to self-testing. There are calls for the tightening of accuracy requirements and implementation of a standard specifically for point-of-care (POC) BGMS.

METHODS

The accuracy of six commonly used BGMS was assessed in a clinical setting, with 108 patients' finger stick capillary samples. Using the accuracy criteria from the existing standard and a range of tightened accuracy criteria, system performance was compared. Other contributors to system performance have been measured, including hematocrit sensitivity and meter error rates encountered in the clinical setting.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Five of the six BGMS evaluated met current accuracy criteria within the ISO 15197 standard. Only the Optium Xceed system had >95% of all readings within a tightened criteria of ±12.5% from the reference at glucose levels ≥72 mg/dl (4 mmol/liter) and ±9 mg/dl (0.5 mmol/liter) at glucose levels <72 mg/dl (4 mmol/liter). The Nova StatStrip Xpress had the greatest number of error messages observed; Optium Xceed the least. OneTouch Ultra2, Nova StatStrip Xpress, Accu-Chek Performa, and Contour TS products were all significantly influenced by blood hematocrit levels.

CONCLUSIONS

From evidence obtained during this clinical evaluation, the Optium Xceed system is most likely to meet future anticipated accuracy standards for POC BGMS. In this clinical study, the results demonstrated the Optium Xceed product to have the highest level of accuracy, to have the lowest occurrence of error messages, and to be least influenced by blood hematocrit levels.

Intraoperative accuracy of a point-of-care glucose meter compared with simultaneous central laboratory measurements

BACKGROUND

Concerns have been raised about the use of point-of-care (POC) glucose meters in the hospital setting. Accuracy has been questioned especially in critically ill patients. Although commonly used in intensive care units and operating rooms, POC meters were not approved by the Food and Drug Administration for such use. Data on POC glucose meter performance during anesthesia are lacking. We evaluated accuracy of a POC meter in the intraoperative setting.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 4,333 intraoperative records in which at least one intraoperative glucose was measured using electronic medical records at a large academic hospital. We evaluated the accuracy of a POC glucose meter (ACCU-CHEK® Inform, Roche Pharmaceuticals) based on the 176 simultaneous central laboratory (CL) blood glucose (BG) measurements that were found (i.e., documented collection times within 5 minutes). Point-of-care and central lab BG differences were analyzed by Bland-Altman and revised error grid analysis (rEGA).

RESULTS

Mean POC BG was 163.4 ± 64.7 mg/dl [minimum (min) 48 mg/dl, maximum (max) 537 mg/dl] and mean CL BG was 162.6 ± 65.1 mg/dl (min 44 mg/dl, max 502 mg/dl). Mean absolute difference between POC and CL BG was 24.3 mg/dl. Mean absolute relative difference was 16.5% with standard deviation 26.4%. Point-of-care measurements showed a bias of 0.8 relative to the corresponding CL value, with a precision of 39.0 mg/dl. Forty (23%) POC BG values fell outside the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guideline and 3.4% POC measurements fell in zones C and D of the rEGA plot.

CONCLUSIONS

The tested POC glucose meter performed poorly compared to a CL analyzer intraoperatively. Perioperative clinicians should be aware of limitations of specific POC glucose meters, and routine use of POC glucose meters as sole measurement devices in the intraoperative period should be carefully considered.

Accuracy in blood glucose measurement: what will a tightening of requirements yield?

Nowadays, almost all persons with diabetes--at least those using antidiabetic drug therapy--use one of a plethora of meters commercially available for self-monitoring of blood glucose. The accuracy of blood glucose (BG) measurement using these meters has been presumed to be adequate; that is, the accuracy of these devices was not usually questioned until recently. Health authorities in the United States (Food and Drug Administration) and in other countries are currently endeavoring to tighten the requirements for the accuracy of these meters above the level that is currently stated in the standard ISO 15197. At first glance, this does not appear to be a problem and is hardly worth further consideration, but a closer look reveals a considerable range of critical aspects that will be discussed in this commentary. In summary, one could say that as a result of modern production methods and ongoing technical advances, the demands placed on the quality of measurement results obtained with BG meters can be increased to a certain degree. One should also take into consideration that the system accuracy (which covers many more aspects as the analytical accuracy) required to make correct therapeutical decisions certainly varies for different types of therapy. At the end, in addition to analytical accuracy, thorough and systematic training of patients and regular refresher training is important to minimize errors. Only under such circumstances will patients make appropriate therapeutic interventions to optimize and maintain metabolic control.

Blood glucose measurements in critically ill patients

Studies on tight glycemic control by intensive insulin therapy abruptly changed the climate of limited interest in the problem of hyperglycemia in critically ill patients and reopened the discussion on accuracy and reliability of glucose sensor devices. This article describes important components of blood glucose measurements and their interferences with the focus on the intensive care unit setting. Typical methodologies, organized from analytical accuracy to clinical accuracy, to assess imprecision and bias of a glucose sensor are also discussed. Finally, a list of recommendations and requirements to be considered when evaluating (time-discrete) glucose sensor devices is given.

Perioperative glycemic management in 2011: paradigm shifts

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The publication of Van den Berghe's landmark study in 2001 supported the use of intensive insulin therapy (IIT) to target normoglycemia in the critically ill and triggered a new era in glycemic management in the perioperative period and in the ICU. In 2009, the normoglycemia in intensive care evaluation-survival using glucose algorithm regulation (NICE-SUGAR) trial demonstrated increased mortality and incidence of hypoglycemia in patients managed with IIT, resulting in a shift toward higher blood glucose targets in this patient population. This review distills clinically pertinent principles from the related literature published in the months since the NICE-SUGAR trial.

RECENT FINDINGS

A target blood glucose level in the acute care setting supported by many of the pertinent societies and frequently quoted in the literature is 140-180 mg/dl. Hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, and glucose variability are detrimental. Accurate and efficient glucose monitoring devices are essential. Insulin infusion protocols (IIPs) employed to achieve desired blood glucose targets must be individualized and validated for the ICU and institution in which they are being implemented.

SUMMARY

Appropriate glycemic management in the acute care setting can be achieved by targeting a reasonable blood glucose range and employing specific and institutionally validated IIPs.

Consensus report: the current role of self-monitoring of blood glucose in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes

The Coalition for Clinical Research--Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose Scientific Board convened a meeting in San Francisco, CA, July 20-21, 2011, to discuss the current practice of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in non-insulin-treated (NIT) type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Twelve physician panel members from academia, practice, and government attended this meeting. These experts came from the United States, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and the United Kingdom. In addition, three consultants from Australia, Germany, and the United States contributed to the group's final report. This coalition was organized by Diabetes Technology Society. Self-monitoring of blood glucose was studied from eight perspectives related to patients with NIT T2DM: (1) epidemiological studies; (2) randomized controlled trials (RCT)s and meta-analyses; (3) targets, timing, and frequency of SMBG use; (4) incidence and role of SMBG in preventing hypoglycemia with single-drug regimens and combination regimens consisting of antihyperglycemic agents other than secretagogues and insulin; (5) comparison of SMBG with continuous glucose monitoring; (6) technological capabilities and limitations of SMBG; (7) barriers to appropriate use of SMBG; and (8) methods and end points for appropriate future clinical trials. The panel emphasized recent studies, which reflect the current approach for applying this intervention. Among the participants there was consensus that: SMBG is an established practice for patients with NIT T2DM, and to be most effective, it should be performed in a structured format where information obtained from this measurement is used to guide treatment; New, high-quality efficacy data from RCTs have demonstrated efficacy of SMBG in NIT T2DM in trials reported since 2008; Both patients and health care professionals require education on how to respond to the data for SMBG to be effective; and Additional well-defined studies are needed to assess the benefits and costs of SMBG with end points not limited to hemoglobin A1c.

Performance evaluation and labeling comprehension of a new blood glucose monitoring system with integrated information management

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated performance and product labeling of CONTOUR® USB, a new blood glucose monitoring system (BGMS) with integrated diabetes management software and a universal serial bus (USB) port, in the hands of untrained lay users and health care professionals (HCPs).

METHOD

Subjects and HCPs tested subject's finger stick capillary blood in parallel using CONTOUR USB meters; deep finger stick blood was tested on a Yellow Springs Instruments (YSI) glucose analyzer for reference. Duplicate results by both subjects and HCPs were obtained to assess system precision. System accuracy was assessed according to International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15197:2003 guidelines [within ±15 mg/dl of mean YSI results (samples <75 mg/dl) and ±20% (samples ≥75 mg/dl)]. Clinical accuracy was determined by Parkes error grid analysis. Subject labeling comprehension was assessed by HCP ratings of subject proficiency. Key system features and ease-of-use were evaluated by subject questionnaires.

RESULTS

All subjects who completed the study (N = 74) successfully performed blood glucose measurements, connected the meter to a laptop computer, and used key features of the system. The system was accurate; 98.6% (146/148) of subject results and 96.6% (143/148) of HCP results exceeded ISO 15197:2003 criteria. All subject and HCP results were clinically accurate (97.3%; zone A) or associated with benign errors (2.7%; zone B). The majority of subjects rated features of the BGMS as "very good" or "excellent."

CONCLUSIONS

CONTOUR USB exceeded ISO 15197:2003 system performance criteria in the hands of untrained lay users. Subjects understood the product labeling, found the system easy to use, and successfully performed blood glucose testing.

Accuracy of the CONTOUR® blood glucose monitoring system

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to assess the accuracy of the CONTOUR® blood glucose monitoring system (BGMS) according to the International Organization for Standardization's International Standard 15197 (ISO 15197:2003) guidelines and to more stringent criteria.

METHOD

Finger stick blood samples from 105 subjects with diabetes (25 with type 1, 77 with type 2, and 3 with type unknown) were tested using the CONTOUR BGMS and YSI glucose analyzer.

RESULTS

99.3% of results were within ISO 15197:2003 criteria (±15 mg/dl of YSI results at glucose concentrations <75 mg/dl and ±20% at glucose concentrations ≥75 mg/dl). Additionally, 96.7% of results were accurate according to more stringent criteria (±15 mg/dl of YSI results for glucose concentrations <100 mg/dl and ±15% for glucose concentrations ≥100 mg/dl). Error grid analysis showed that 99.3% and 0.7% of results were within zones A and B, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The CONTOUR BGMS exceeded both the minimum acceptable accuracy based on ISO 15197:2003 and the more stringent accuracy criteria.

Preanalytic and analytic accuracy: toward more realistic and meaningful self-monitoring of blood glucose submissions for regulatory approval

Dr. Cembrowski provides an analysis of an article by Harrison and colleagues in this issue of Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology in which the authors describe the evaluation of a new device for self-monitoring of blood glucose, the Bayer CONTOUR® blood glucose monitoring system.

Accuracy and precision evaluation of seven self-monitoring blood glucose systems

BACKGROUND

Self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) systems play a critical role in management of diabetes. SMBG systems should at least meet the minimal requirement of the World Health Organization's ISO 15197:2003. For tight glycemic control, a tighter accuracy requirement is needed.

METHODS

Seven SMBG systems were evaluated for accuracy and precision: Bionime Rightest(™) GM550 (Bionime Corp., Dali City, Taiwan), Accu-Chek(®) Performa (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN), OneTouch(®) Ultra(®)2 (LifeScan Inc., Milpitas, CA), MediSense(®) Optium(™) Xceed (Abbott Diabetes Care Inc., Alameda, CA), Medisafe (TERUMO Corp., Tokyo, Japan), Fora(®) TD4227 (Taidac Technology Corp., Wugu Township, Taiwan), and Ascensia Contour(®) (Bayer HealthCare LLC, Mishawaka, IN). The 107 participants (44 men and 63 women) were between 23 and 91 years old. The analytical results of seven SMBG systems were compared with those of plasma analyzed with the hexokinase method (Olympus AU640, Olympus America Inc., Center Valley, PA).

RESULTS

The imprecision of the seven blood glucose meters ranged from 1.1% to 4.7%. Three of the seven blood glucose meters (42.9%) fulfilled the minimum accuracy criteria of ISO 15197:2003. The mean absolute relative error value for each blood glucose meter was calculated and ranged from 6.5% to 12.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

More than 40% of evaluated SMBG systems meet the minimal accuracy criteria requirement of ISO 15197:2003. However, considering tighter criteria for accuracy of ±15%, only the Bionime Rightest GM550 meets this requirement. Because SMBG systems play a critical role in management of diabetes, manufacturers have to strive to improve accuracy and precision and to ensure the good quality of blood glucose meters and test strips.

Intensive insulin therapy in critically ill hospitalized patients: making it safe and effective

Intensive insulin therapy (IIT) for hyperglycemia in critically ill patients has become a standard practice. Target levels for glycemia have fluctuated since 2000, as evidence initially indicated that tight glycemic control to so-called normoglycemia (80-110 mg/dl) leads to the lowest morbidity and mortality without hypoglycemic complications. Subsequent studies have demonstrated minimal clinical benefit combined with greater hypoglycemic morbidity and mortality with tight glycemic control in this population. The consensus glycemic targets were then liberalized to the mid 100s (mg/dl). Handheld POC blood glucose (BG) monitors have migrated from the outpatient setting to the hospital environment because they save time and money for managing critically ill patients who require IIT. These devices are less accurate than hospital-grade POC blood analyzers or central laboratory analyzers. Three questions must be answered to understand the role of IIT for defined populations of critically ill patients: (1) How safe is IIT, with various glycemic targets, from the risk of hypoglycemia? (2) How tightly must BG be controlled for this approach to be effective? (3) What role does the accuracy of BG measurements play in affecting the safety of this method? For each state of impaired glucose regulation seen in the hospital, such as hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, or glucose variability, the benefits, risks, and goals of treatment, including IIT, might differ. With improved accuracy of BG monitors, IIT might be rendered even more intensive than at present, because patients will be less likely to receive inadvertent overdosages of insulin. Greater doses of insulin, but with dosing based on more accurate glucose levels, might result in less hypoglycemia, less hyperglycemia, and less glycemic variability.

Patient acuity exacerbates discrepancy between whole blood and plasma methods through error in molality to molarity conversion: "Mind the gap!"

OBJECTIVE

A mathematical constant factor is proposed to convert measured whole blood glucose molality to plasma-equivalent molarity. The objective of this study was to determine the distributions of conversion factors for groups of patients with different acuity and to assess the gap or error in plasma-equivalent glucose reporting that would occur when a mathematical constant conversion factor is used in patients.

METHODS

Distributions of hematocrit, red blood cell water and plasma water were determined in patients from the community, hospital and adult intensive care unit. Volume displacement conversion factor distributions and glucose error were determined for each group.

RESULTS

With increasing patient acuity the median hematocrit decreased, median plasma water increased and variation of these parameters increased. In hospital patients, the molality to molarity conversion factor distribution interval was 1.04-1.16, rather than a constant 1.11. Assuming direct electrode glucose devices only have error attributed to analytical imprecision (coefficient of variation of 5%), it is predicted that only 2% of community patients will have glucose results that exceed 10% of the target values. In the same device, due to variance in hematocrit and plasma water affecting the factor for conversion of molality to molarity, it is predicted that 8.2% of adult intensive care unit patients would have glucose results that exceed 10% of the target value.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in hematocrit and plasma water concentration are predicted to affect a gap or error between whole blood direct reading biosensors and central laboratory plasma methods. This error increases and becomes more variable as patient acuity increases.

Analysis of the performance of the CONTOUR® TS Blood Glucose Monitoring System: when regulatory performance criteria are met, should we have confidence to use a medical device with all patients?

The article entitled, Performance of the CONTOUR® TS Blood Glucose Monitoring System, by Frank and colleagues in this issue of Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, demonstrates that the CONTOUR® TS glucose meter exceeds current regulatory expectations for glucose meter performance. However, the appropriateness of current regulatory expectations, such as International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15197:2003, is being reevaluated because of increasing concern regarding the reliability of glucose meters in ambulatory and hospitalized environments. Between 2004 and 2008, 12,673 serious adverse events with glucose meters that met the ISO 15197 expectations were reported in the Food and Drug Administration-Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience surveillance database. Should different glucose meter performance criteria be applied to ambulatory versus critical care patients?

Estimates of total analytical error in consumer and hospital glucose meters contributed by hematocrit, maltose, and ascorbate

BACKGROUND

Patients and physicians expect accurate whole blood glucose monitoring even when patients are anemic, are undergoing peritoneal dialysis, or have slightly elevated ascorbate levels. The objective of this study was to estimate analytical error in two consumer and two hospital glucose meters contributed by variations in hematocrit, maltose, ascorbate, and imprecision.

METHODS

The influence of hematocrit (20-60%), maltose, and ascorbate were tested alone and in combination with each glucose meter and with a reference plasma glucose method at three concentrations of glucose. Precision was determined by consecutive analysis (n=20) at three levels of glucose. Multivariate regression analysis was used to estimate the bias associated with the interferences, alone and in combination. Total analytical error was estimated as |% bias|+1.96 (% imprecision).

RESULTS

Three meters demonstrated hematocrit bias that was dependent upon glucose concentration. Maltose had profound concentration-dependent positive bias on the consumer meters, and the extent of maltose bias was dependent on hematocrit. Ascorbate produced small but statistically significant biases on three meters. Coincident low hematocrit, presence of maltose, and presence of ascorbate increased the observed bias and was summarized by estimation of total analytical error. Among the four glucose meter devices assessed, estimates of total analytical error in glucose measurement ranged from 6 to 68% under the conditions tested.

CONCLUSIONS

The susceptibility of glucose meters to clinically significant analytical biases is highly device-dependent, and low hematocrit exacerbated the observed analytical error.

Glucose information for tight glycemic control: different methods with different challenges

Rigorous glucose control is essential for prevention of diabetes-related complications in diabetes patients. Even without diabetes, tight glucose control is beneficial in hospitalized, critically ill patients. Actually, three different glucose measurement methods are used: (1) hand held devices, (2) blood-gas analyzers, and (3) laboratory analyzers in core laboratories. Each method is subject to specific challenges and limitations that can affect the overall system performance. In this article, we aim to demonstrate that even glucose measurement results from core laboratories (professional laboratory systems) do not necessarily reflect the absolute "true" glucose level of a patient.