Accuracy Performance of the Medtronic NexSensor® for 6 Days in an Inpatient Setting Using Abdomen and Buttocks Insertion Sites

Abstract

The NexSensor was accurate for inpatient, frequent-sample testing for 6 days when inserted into the abdomen and buttocks. The results of this study also provide evidence that both the abdomen and buttocks are suitable as sensor insertion sites.

Is the Response of Continuous Glucose Monitors to Physiological Changes in Blood Glucose Levels Affected by Sensor Life?

“…27 This early ''break-in'' period refers to the period of time the sensor requires to become intrinsically stable after insertion. 28 Although others have reported a higher disagreement between reference and CGM values on day 1 compared with the following days of wear, 8,13 this observation is not corroborated by our own findings and those of others 10 as indicated by the lack of differences across all performance measures between the first 2 days of sensor use. However, because our study did not examine the first 12 h of CGM use after insertion, our results do not exclude the possibility that sensor performance may have been poorer during this period compared with other times.…”

“…Although most but not all 5 studies suggest that sensor performance remains relatively stable over 3, 6-9 5, 10-12 6, 13 7,14 or 10 15 days, many of these studies did not support their findings with any statistical analyses, 5,7,8,10,13,14 and several important accuracy issues were not addressed. For instance, it remains to be established whether several days of wear affect sensor accuracy under conditions of rapid changes in blood glucose levels.…”

“…As mentioned earlier, this is because none of these studies matched testing conditions between consecutive days, examined lag time, and addressed CGM performance in response to rapid changes in blood glucose levels, [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] and all of these studies overlooked the potential confounding effect of the decrease in blood glucose variability with CGM time of wear. 21 In contrast, these limitations were overcome in this study by exposing the unit on consecutive days to a reproducible pattern of change in blood glucose levels.…”

Continuous glucose monitoring: quality of hypoglycaemia detection

“…The use of individual CGM alert settings has been suggested to optimize the practical use of CGM [22]. Recent and future technological developments such as improved calibration algorithms [14,23] and new, more accurate sensors [24] are needed to help to improve detection of hypoglycaemia with CGM and enhance its potential as a therapeutic and research tool. The performance of these new and future systems should be systematically evaluated in appropriately designed clinical studies to assess the progress that may have been made.…”

Continuous Glucose Monitoring: Professional and Real Time

“…In clinical trials the Enlite sensor had a mean absolute relative difference (MARD) of 13.86%, based on 6,404 plasma-sensor glucose paired points [6]. This is an improvement compared to NexSensor, which was found to have a MARD of 17.1% using abdomen site data, and Sof-Sensor, which was found to have a MARD of 19.7% [7].…”