Sensitization to cyanoacrylates caused by prolonged exposure to a glucose sensor set in a diabetic child

[Translated article] Medical Devices in Patients With Diabetes and Contact Dermatitis

The development and commercialization of glucose sensors and insulin pumps has revolutionized the management of diabetes. These devices have been linked to multiple cases of contact dermatitis in recent years, however, giving rise to a growing interest in identifying the sensitizing allergens. Isobornyl acrylate was clearly identified as one of the main allergens responsible for contact dermatitis among users of the FreeStyle glucose sensor and was subsequently removed from the product ingredients. Remarkably, however, it is still used in most other sensors on the market. The common adhesive ingredients colophony and abietic acid derivatives have also been shown to be sensitizing agents. New components under study, such as dipropylene glycol diacrylate, N,N-dimethylacrylamide, and triethylene glycol methacrylate have recently been identified as allergens, though they are not commercially available for clinical testing. The benefits offered by glucose sensors and insulin pumps may be offset by sensitization to product ingredients, in some cases forcing discontinuation and diminishing quality of life. Dermatologists should play a role in this clinical and research scenario, offering case-by-case guidance to endocrinologists on skin care and possible alternatives for patients with glucose sensors and insulin pumps who develop contact dermatitis. They should also collaborate with the manufacturers developing these devices.

Contact Dermatitis to Diabetes Medical Devices

Skin adverse reactions to diabetes medical devices have been reported frequently over recent years. Adhesives attaching glucose sensors and continuous insulin infusion sets to the skin are proven to cause both allergic contact dermatitis and irritant contact dermatitis in patients with diabetes mellitus. Several allergens contained in adhesives and/or parts of medical devices are documented to cause allergic contact dermatitis, with acrylate chemicals being the most common culprit-especially isobornyl acrylate (IBOA), but also 2,2'-methylenebis(6-tert-butyl-4-methylphenol) monoacrylate or cyanoacrylates. Epoxy resin, colophonium and nickel were also identified as causative allergens. However, repetitive occlusion, maceration of the skin and resulting disruption of the skin barrier seem to have an impact on the development of skin lesions as well. The purpose of this study is to highlight the burden of contact dermatitis triggered by diabetes medical devices and to show possible mechanisms responsible for the development of contact dermatitis in a group of diabetic patients.

Practicalities of Flash-monitoring systems utilization in the questionnaire survey of children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND: Children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) are recommended to perform self-control 6–10 times a day to maintain optimal blood glucose levels. Currently, there are various devices, such as glucometers, systems for continuous blood glucose monitoring and flash monitoring (FMS). In real clinical practice patients can combine the use of various devices and face with problems of their exploitation.

AIM: To investigate the peculiarities of FMS utilization by children and adolescents with T1DM using questionnaire survey.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 06.2020 till 05.2021, a survey of patients with T1DM was conducted as part of a single-center, observational, one-stage, uncontrolled study. The questionnaire contained questions regarding the number of measurements, circumstances and adverse reactions when using the devices.

RESULTS: We questioned 80 patients (47 girls and 33 boys) aged 11.7 (9.0; 14.0) years with DM1 for 4.9 (2.0; 7.0) years, HbA1c level 8.2 (6.8; 9.0)) which were in pediatric endocrinology department of the University Children’s Clinical Hospital.

The majority of patients (86.3%) scan the sensor more than 10 times a day; 25% of FMS-users measure blood glucose with glucometer not every day.

The majority of patients (51,3%) prefer to use FMS instead of glucometer in all circumstances. Patients face with errors using FMS more often than using glucometers — OR 3.4 (95% CI 1.7–6.8). Non-significant reaction to adhesive material disturbed 50.0% participants; one patient (1.3%) had to refuse FMS due to allergic reaction.

Among possible reasons to refuse FMS patients often name error, skin sealing, high price, inflammation, inconvenience to wear a device.

Additional measures for fixing FMS device are always used by 36,3% of patients, sometimes — 18,8%, in some situations (going in for sports, swimming, travelling, in case of unsticking at the end of term) — 15,0%.

CONCLUSION: Quarter of FMS users double-check glycaemia values rarer than recommended. Patients face with error using FMS more often than using glucometer. Local reaction to adhesive material does not influence FMS utilization. The majority of patients use additional measures for fixing FMS devices.

Contact allergy to the Dexcom G6 glucose monitoring system -role of 2,2'-methylenebis(6-tert-butyl-4-methylphenol) monoacrylate in the new adhesive

BACKGROUND

Skin reactions to the glucose monitoring systems Dexcom G5 and G6 have been rare. In 2019, the components of the adhesive were exchanged for better skin fixation. Since then, more and more patients experienced severe skin reactions. A few months ago, 2,2'-methylenebis(6-tert-butyl-4-methylphenol) monoacrylate (MBPA) was identified as a new component in the adhesive of the G6 model. Furthermore, it was suspected that isobornylacrylate (IBOA) was also a component of the exchanged adhesive.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to investigate if MBPA plays a major role in the increasing skin problems of patients without a history of IBOA-sensitization. Furthermore, our aim was to examine whether IBOA is contained in the newer model adhesive and may also contribute to allergic contact dermatitis (ACD).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Five patients with a newly occurred ACD caused by the glucose monitoring system Dexcom G6 were investigated. Patch testing including MBPA in 3 different concentrations, as well as IBOA were performed. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry of the newer system Dexcom G6 was carried out.

RESULTS

All patients were shown to be sensitized to MBPA, while MBPA 0,5% showed the strongest reaction. On the other hand, IBOA was tested negative.

CONCLUSION

In our study group MBPA was observed to be the triggering allergen of the recently changed adhesive.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis, an Important Skin Reaction in Diabetes Device Users: A Systematic Review

ABSTRACT

Diabetes management has undergone many advances over the years, including the introduction of devices that allow patients to monitor blood glucose and administer insulin. Although these devices have improved patients' quality of life, they are associated with adverse reactions.A systematic literature search was performed up to May 2020 in PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases, with no temporal restrictions. Articles were screened by title, abstract, and full text as needed. A manual search among the references of the included articles was also performed.Two hundred sixty-five articles were identified, and 50 studies met inclusion criteria. Several cases of allergic contact dermatitis due to the use of insulin infusion systems and blood glucose monitoring have been reported. Acrylates, methacrylates, and colophonium, as well as, in particular, isobornyl acrylate, represent the main allergens responsible.Skin reactions, in particular allergic contact dermatitis, are a very common adverse event caused by insulin pumps and glucose sensors, which may lead to discontinue the usage of these devices with serious consequences for the patients. Collaboration between specialists, specifically between dermatologists and diabetologists, with patients and manufacturers is essential for the correct management of diabetes devices and potential related skin reactions.

Skin Involvement in Paediatric Patients with Type 1 Diabetes

Skin involvement is an overlooked aspect in the management of paediatric patients with type 1 diabetes. A comprehensive search of published literature using the PubMed database was carried out using the following key terms: "children," "pediatric/paediatric patients," "skin," "skin disorders," "type 1 diabetes." Dermatological side effects are frequently observed among diabetic children and adolescents. Insulin-induced lipodystrophies and allergic contact dermatitis caused by insulin pumps or glycaemic sensors are the most common skin reactions in these patients. Furthermore, several diabetes-associated skin diseases such as necrobiosis lipoidica, granuloma annulare, vitiligo, and bullosis diabeticorum may already be present in paediatric patients. Paediatric diabetes specialists should pay attention to their patients' skin to recognize these disorders, identify the potential causes, and choose the most suitable treatment. Finally, the evaluation of skin concentrations of advanced glycation end-products using non-invasive diagnostic techniques may be used to assess the risk of chronic complications of diabetes as early as adolescence.

Modern diabetes devices for continuous blood sugar measuring: Limitations due to contact allergies

During the past years, diabetes diseases have increased significantly worldwide. However, new technologies such as continuous glucose measurement using a subcutaneous sensor are developing just as rapidly. A continuous improvement in insulin pump therapy is also contributing to an improved quality of life. A common feature of these modern devices for diabetes therapy is that they remain fixed in place on the skin for several days. In recent years, skin reactions, in particular pronounced contact dermatitis due to the devices and their adhesives have been increasingly reported. In particular, isobornyl acrylate, which used to be included in a glucose measurement sensor set, was identified as a main allergen. Development of contact allergy can result both in a necessity to quit the measuring system and in allergic cross-reactions to other systems.

Acrylates as a significant cause of allergic contact dermatitis: new sources of exposure

Acrylate monomers have a wide range of applications. Since the 1950s, many reports of occupational origin allergic contact dermatitis due to (meth)acrylate monomers have been published. During last decades, (meth)acrylate allergy has undergone an occupational shift from dentistry toward beauty industry and medical devices. The aim of the study was to conduct a literature review on acrylates as a cause of allergic contact dermatitis, current sources of exposure as well as identification of professional groups with an increased risk of this allergy and methods of effective prevention. Database review: Medline search (PubMed), Wiley Online Library and Web of Science base in years 1956–2019 using the following keywords: acrylates, manicurists, dentists, dental technicians, medical devices, occupational exposure, and allergic contact dermatitis. 204 346 articles containing the term ‘acrylates‘ have been found. They include 2 042 articles with the word ‘manicurists’, 169 919 – ‘dentists’, 218 236 – ‘dental technicians’, 2 427 418 – ‘medical devices’. Fifty-nine articles were chosen based on analysis of abstracts and full texts. In the past allergy to acrylates was mainly of occupational origin and dental technicians were the most often affected professional group. Since the long-lasting manicure has become popular, this problem concerns both manicurists and their customers. Moreover, the new significant trend is non-occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by medical devices especially dedicated to diabetes patients.

Extraction With Sweat-Sebum Emulsion as a New Test Method for Leachables in Patch-Based Medical Devices, Illustrated by Assessment of Isobornylacrylate (IBOA) in Diabetes Products

BACKGROUND

The increasing offering of patch-based medical devices is accompanied by growing numbers of reported adverse skin reactions. Procedures for testing leachables according to ISO 10993 may not be optimal for lipophilic substances that can be mobilized on skin by sweat and sebum. We propose an improved extraction method for targeted analysis of leachables using low volumes of a sweat-sebum emulsion. The approach is illustrated by the analysis of isobornylacrylate (IBOA), a compound found in some devices and suspected for allergenic potential.

METHOD

Three patch-based products were tested: an implantable device for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), an intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM) device, and a micro-insulin pump. Quantification of IBOA was performed by gas chromatography and allergenic potential of IBOA levels was assessed by the KeratinoSens cell assay. Different combinations were used for extraction solvent (isopropanol, 5% ethanol-water solution, and sweat-sebum emulsion), extraction volumes (complete immersion vs partial immersion in 2 mm of solvent), and extraction time (3, 5, and 14 days).

RESULTS

Isobornylacrylate was only found in the isCGM device. About 20 mg/L IBOA were eluted after 3 days in isopropanol but only about 1 mg/L in ethanol-water. Sweat-sebum emulsion dissolves IBOA better and gives a more stable solution than ethanol-water. Decomposition of IBOA solutions requires adjusted extraction timing or correction of results. In the sweat-sebum extract, IBOA levels were about 20 mg/L after 3 days and about 30 mg/L after 5 days, clearly above the threshold found in the KerationSens assay for keratinocyte activation (10 mg/L).

CONCLUSION

Extraction by low volumes of sweat-sebum emulsion can be a superior alternative for the targeted simulating-use assessment of leachables in patch-based medical devices.

Contact Dermatitis From Glucose Sensors In Spain: A Multicentric Approach

BACKGROUND

Allergic contact dermatitis from glucose sensors may interfere with their ongoing application.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate a series of Spanish patients with contact dermatitis to glucose sensors regarding former sources of contact allergens, patch test results and outcomes from the ongoing use of the device.

METHODS

A series of patients with contact dermatitis from glucose sensors was investigated in eight dermatology departments across Spain epidemiologic features, brands, latency time to develop dermatitis, the ability to continue using the devices as well as the patch test results.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were evaluated mean age: ²⁰ .⁹³ years. ⁶⁶ .⁷ % were children and ⁶⁶ .⁷ % female. ⁹⁰ .⁰ % used Freestyle Libre FSL. ⁸ /^{26 30} .⁸ % reacted to isobornyl acrylate IBOA and ² /^{20 10} .⁰ % to N,N dimethylacrylamide DMAA. The mean latency time to develop dermatitis was ⁹ months. ¹⁶ /^{29 55} .² % patients continued using the same sensor causing the reaction. ¹³ /^{29 44} .⁸ % were unable to continue using the sensor due to severe reactions. Of them, ⁵ were positive to IBOA, one to IBOA and DMAA; one to DMAA; one to colophony and ¹ to isopropyl alcohol wipes. In one patient the outcome was unknown.

CONCLUSION

The frequency of sensitization to IBOA and DMAA, was lower than in other European series, but similar to a previously published Spanish article. Legislation requiring manufacturers to provide information regarding medical devices composition and cooperate with the investigation of contact dermatitis is urgently needed. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Position statement: The need for EU legislation to require disclosure and labelling of the composition of medical devices

BACKGROUND

In recent years, skin reactions secondary to the use of medical devices (MD), such as allergic contact dermatitis have increasingly been observed (e.g. to continuous blood sugar monitoring systems, insulin pumps, wound dressings, medical gloves, etc.): this is regarded as a developing epidemic. Lack of labelling of the composition of MD, as well as frequent lack of cooperation of manufacturers to disclose this relevant information, even when contacted by the clinician for the individual case of an established adverse reaction, significantly impede patient care.

OBJECTIVES

To advocate for full ingredient labelling in the implementation of EU regulation for MD.

METHODS

This position paper reviews the scientific literature, the current regulatory framework adopted for MD to date, and the likely impact, including some costs data in case of the absence of such labelling.

RESULTS

Efforts made by several scientific teams, who are trying to identify the culprit of such adverse effects, either via asking for cooperation from companies, or using costly chemical analyses of MD, can only partly, and with considerable delay, compensate for the absence of meaningful information on the composition of MD; hence, patient management is compromised. Indeed, without knowing the chemical substances present, physicians are unable to inform patients about which substances they should avoid, and which alternative MD may be suitable/tolerated.

CONCLUSION

There is an urgent need for full and accurate labelling of the chemical composition of MD in contact with the human body.

Wearable Woes: Allergens in Diabetic Devices

Novel diabetic devices are being developed to help manage diabetes and improve the quality of life of patients with diabetes. Both insulin pumps and glucose monitors are becoming increasingly convenient, long-lasting, and discrete for patients, but this often requires the use of strong external cutaneous adhesives and increased contact time with the skin. As a consequence, these devices have been associated with a variety of dermatologic reactions, namely, irritant and allergic contact dermatitis. Some of these reactions can be severe, precluding the use of these devices, which puts patients' long-term health at risk. Herein, we review the history of diabetic devices and reported cutaneous reactions to diabetic devices and commonly cited allergens.

Contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors, insulin pumps, and tapes: Results from a 5-year period

BACKGROUND

The number of patients with contact dermatitis from glucose sensors and insulin infusion sets is increasing. Patch testing is challenging because of a lack of information concerning the constituent materials of medical devices.

OBJECTIVES

To report on products and causes of allergic reactions to glucose sensors or insulin infusion sets over a 5-year period and suggest a short screening series.

METHODS

Analysis of patch test data from consecutive patients suspected of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to glucose sensors and/or insulin infusion sets from 2015-2019.

RESULTS

Patient numbers increased from 4 to 15 per year; 30/38 (78.9%) were children. In 29 (76.3%), a diagnosis of allergic/probable ACD was established, mostly due to the tapes of the device or allergens in these tapes (n = 23) followed by allergens in the device housing (n = 10). Isobornyl acrylate, abitol, and colophonium were the most common allergens. Information from manufacturers was often difficult to obtain and, if accessible, inadequate. For this reason, the diagnosis was delayed for more than 1.5 years in 12 (31%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The increasing number of patients, mostly children, with ACD from devices used in treatment of type 1 diabetes demonstrates the importance of this problem. Allergies can easily be overlooked, due to the lack of mandatory labeling of the constituent materials of the devices.

Allergic contact dermatitis in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes: An emerging issue

AIMS

Aim of our observational study was to assess the prevalence of allergic contact dermatitis among children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes who use technological devices for diabetes treatment and its management. Secondary outcome was to identify possible clinical and/or demographic variables that could be associated to contact dermatitis.

METHODS

Among a total of 215 patients using insulin pumps and/or glucose sensors followed-up at our Pediatric Diabetes Centre between January and September 2018, 64 patients were enrolled and 42 (19 male and 23 female) completed the study. Demographic and clinical features of the study population were statistically analysed. All the patients underwent patch testing with specific allergens belonged to resin and acrylate classes.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients experienced skin reactions suggestive of allergic contact dermatitis, demonstrating a prevalence of 8.4%. None of the demographic or clinical variables were associated to skin reactions. Colophonium was the most identified sensitizing allergen (87.5% of the cases).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of sensitization to allergens included into diabetes devices among pediatric patients is higher than commonly assumed. Well-designed studies are needed to better investigate the association between type 1 diabetes and allergic contact dermatitis. Moreover, we suggest that manufactures should supply detailed information about adhesives in order to avoid dermatological complications and consequently a worsening of disease management and patients' quality of life.

"Out of the box" solution for skin problems due to glucose-monitoring technology in youth with type 1 diabetes: real-life experience with fluticasone spray

BACKGROUND

Use of a continuous glucose-monitoring system (CGMS) in the management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) may cause local skin irritation.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the effects of fluticasone propionate aqueous nasal solution (nsFP), sprayed topically prior to CGMS insertion among youth with T1D.

METHODS

This is a case series observational report, including real-life 6-month follow-up data from one pediatric diabetes center. All patients suffering from local skin irritation due to CGMS adhesives were offered prevention form skin irritation by spraying 2 puffs of nsFP on the skin area prior to adhesion of CGMS. Data were collected from their charts after 6 months. Outcome measures included the difference in degree of skin irritation, number of days of CGMS use, BMI SDS, mean glucose, and HbA1c, prior to use and during 6 months after use.

RESULTS

Twelve patients used nsFP prior to CGMS insertion, mean age 8.6 ± 4.9 years and 66.7% males. Ten patients, median age 6.1 years (5.3-9.5) and 56% males, continued using nsFP for a mean of 0.56 ± 0.11 years, with no recurrence of local irritation nor dermatitis to same adhesive material. No differences were found before and after use of nsFP in CGMS mean glucose 180 mg/dl (153-202) versus 165 mg/dl (150-192). BMI SDS was slightly higher 0.44 (- 0.9-1.2) versus 0.25 (- 0.47-1.06), P = 0.05.

CONCLUSIONS

This small-scale, single-site description of a simple intervention by nsFP and favorable outcome provides valuable insight for a simple solution for skin irritation and dermatitis in the pediatric population with T1D.

Cutaneous Complications With Continuous or Flash Glucose Monitoring Use: Systematic Review of Trials and Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)/flash glucose monitoring (FGM) use in diabetes management is increasing. Cutaneous complications associated with these devices were reported. We conducted a systematic review to provide an overview of cutaneous complications with CGM/FGM use.

METHODS

We identified observational studies and intervention trials that report on cutaneous complications with CGM/FGM use up to January 14, 2019. Studies were identified through Medline, Embase, and PubMed, or with hand searching of the previous publications. Screening was duplicated and data extracted to consider four main themes: incidence rate and severity, participant perspectives of cutaneous complications, potential solutions, and future directions in diabetic technology relevant to reducing cutaneous complications.

RESULTS

A total of 54 eligible studies were identified. The overall event rate of cutaneous complications reported from 19 trials was one event per eight weeks of sensor wear-time of which 1.5% were considered severe. The most common cutaneous complications were wear-related erythema, itching, and induration. Although skin irritations were the most common cause of CGM/FGM discontinuation, most users experienced less pain or discomfort with CGM/FGM than capillary blood glucose testing. Future technological advances may reduce, but not eliminate cutaneous complications.

CONCLUSION

The incidence rate of reported cutaneous complications with CGM/FGM use from the available literature is low, with one event per eight weeks of sensor wear-time. Reported complication severity was also low, leading to low rates of CGM/FGM discontinuation. However, there appear to be discrepancies between reporting in trial and observational data. Greater constancy in reporting is necessary to understand the frequency of this issue.

High Prevalence of Skin Reactions Among Pediatric Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Using New Technologies: The Alarming Role of Colophonium

In the past few years, the increasing use of devices for diabetes treatment, such as continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion pumps, flash glucose monitoring, continuous glucose monitoring systems, sensor-augmented pumps, and automated insulin delivery devices, has resulted in important improvements in disease management. Meanwhile, the longer a patient uses a device, the greater the likelihood of developing a skin reaction. Allergic contact dermatitis is the most frequently described skin side effect caused by adhesive tapes contained in the insulin infusion sets or glucose sensor sets and used to connect these devices to the body. We describe 18 patients, followed up at our Pediatric Diabetes Centre, who experienced dermatological complications due to diabetes device use from January 2018 to December 2018. All the patients were patch tested with allergens from a "standard" series and from a "plastics and glues" series. Patch tests resulted positive in 66.7% of patients. Colophonium was the most frequently isolated sensitizing allergen (41.1% of cases). It is a complex mixture of >100 compounds derived from pine trees. Colophonium is commonly used, in both unmodified and modified forms, as a fast-acting adhesive for industrial, medical, or other commercial uses. Its presence in the adhesive of the insulin sets and glucose sensors was confirmed by the manufacturer of some devices brand. On the basis of our results, we stress the importance of contacting manufacturers for product information. We also highlight that there should be stricter legal restrictions to label medical adhesives, even if only small amounts of colophonium are used.

Evaluation of Isobornyl Acrylate Content in Medical Devices for Diabetes Treatment

Background: Along with increased usage of continuous glucose monitors, flash glucose monitors, and patch pumps by patients with diabetes, the frequency of skin reactions has also increased. Skin irritation and itching can be annoying to users. However, more serious contact allergies to one or more components of the adhesives or plastic material of the housing of the devices can become lifelong. Redness and itchiness are so strong that patients can no longer use a particular system. In August 2017, a major culprit allergen, isobornyl acrylate (IBOA), was identified for these more serious reactions. Objectives: Our objective was to evaluate IBOA content in different medical products. Methods: The plastic material used for the housing of the Freestyle Libre (n = 3), Dexcom G6 (n = 3), and Enlite (n = 4) was analyzed for IBOA content by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Adhesives of the different systems were also analyzed. Results: IBOA was found in the housings of Freestyle Libre and Enlite sensor, but not in the Dexcom G6. Conclusions: Patients with an IBOA allergy should consider switching to a medical product without IBOA. Furthermore, removal of IBOA from devices that contact the skin is encouraged.

Cutaneous Adverse Effects of Diabetes Mellitus Medications and Medical Devices: A Review

Diabetes mellitus is one of the most prevalent chronic diseases in the USA. If uncontrolled, diabetes can lead to devastating complications. Diabetes medications and medical devices largely contribute to the significant financial expense that the disease inflicts on affected individuals and society. Alongside significant economic burden, there are numerous cutaneous adverse effects associated with diabetes medications and medical devices. Despite the large and increasing number of individuals living with diabetes and the wide use of the related medications and medical devices, there is limited literature that comprehensively documents their cutaneous adverse effects. These cutaneous adverse effects are significant as they can worsen glycemic control, increase disease distress, and may increase risk of associated complications. Thus, it is important that providers can recognize these cutaneous adverse effects, identify the culprit agents, and can properly manage them. In this article, we provide a critical review of the cutaneous adverse effects of medications and devices used in the management of diabetes and provide insight into risk factors and prevention and an overview of therapeutic management. An emphasis is placed on clinical recognition and treatment for use of the medical providers who, regardless of practice setting, will treat patients with diabetes.

Perception and Possible Causes of Skin Problems to Insulin Pump and Glucose Sensor: Results from Pediatric Focus Groups

Use of insulin pump and glucose sensor in children with diabetes has been shown to cause skin problems such as eczema, wounds, and itching. The mechanisms for development of skin problems are unknown as well as the influence on the everyday life of the patient. The aim of this study was through focus groups to get more perspective on perception of skin problems as well as the patients' view on causes of skin problems. The two focus groups gave new insight into the consequences of skin problems to both patient and parents in terms of itching, concentration, self-esteem, guilt, etc. The focus group gave as well new perspectives on causes of skin problems, and especially three concepts must be further investigated: material (plastic, patch and vacuum effect), time, and skin characteristics.

Skin Problems Associated with Insulin Pumps and Sensors in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

In the future, widespread use of closed-loop infusion (artificial pancreas) systems to treat type 1 diabetes (T1D) may significantly improve glycemic control and enhance treatment flexibility. However, the infusion sets and plasters necessary for these treatments can cause dermatological complications that may hamper the spread of the new technology; few studies have investigated these complications in adults. The aim of this study was to describe the dermatological complications associated with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in adults.

METHODS

A total of 118 adult patients from two different diabetes clinics completed a questionnaire concerning the dermatological complications associated with their CSII and/or CGM treatment, other treatment variables, duration of diabetes, allergies, skin care, and other pathologies.

RESULTS

CGM or CSII use was associated with current eczema, scars, and wounds. In total, 34% of CSII users and 35% of CGM users currently had one or more skin lesions due to the use of these devices. We found no significant association with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, a history of atopic dermatitis, or other skin pathologies. However, multivariate analysis revealed associations with a history of atopy and CSII-associated dermatological complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Dermatological complications were present in one in every three patients and represent a significant challenge to using CSII and CGM to treat adults with T1D. Prospective studies on the causes of these complications will be required to develop preventive strategies and ensure that optimal diabetes treatment approaches that take advantage of the latest technology can be implemented.

Preserving Skin Integrity with Chronic Device Use in Diabetes

Skin integrity and diabetes device placement are ongoing concerns for people with diabetes who utilize continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) and continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion pumps. This is especially significant for individuals with skin sensitivities, pediatric patients, and those who use devices chronically. Dermatological complications are often cited as a barrier to device use and a reason for device discontinuation. Furthermore, it is a frequent topic of discussion in diabetes follow-up visits, although little evidence-based literature exists to guide providers in managing skin integrity issues. The purpose of this article is to review current literature related to the prevalence of dermatological issues with insulin pumps and CGM, discuss published solutions to skin irritation, and to share the consolidated experience of our large academic diabetes clinic to address placement, prophylactic skin care, adhesives, removal, and skin healing with diabetes device use. Recommendations for targeted studies, increased surveillance, and development of new adhesive compounds are suggested to reduce the burden of device wear for management of diabetes.

Contact Allergy: A Review of Current Problems from a Clinical Perspective

Contact allergy is common, affecting 27% of the general population in Europe. Original publications, including case reports, published since 2016 (inclusive) were identified with the aim of collating a full review of current problems in the field. To this end, a literature search employing methods of systematic reviewing was performed in the Medline^® and Web of Science™ databases on 28 January 2018, using the search terms (“contact sensitization” or “contact allergy”). Of 446 non-duplicate publications identified by above search, 147 were excluded based on scrutiny of title, abstract and key words. Of the remaining 299 examined in full text, 291 were deemed appropriate for inclusion, and main findings were summarised in topic sections. In conclusion, diverse sources of exposures to chemicals of widely-differing types and structures, continue to induce sensitisation in man and may result in allergic contact dermatitis. Many of the chemicals are “evergreen” but others are “newcomers”. Vigilance and proper investigation (patch testing) are required to detect and inform of the presence of these haptens to which our populations remain exposed.

Further Evidence of Severe Allergic Contact Dermatitis From Isobornyl Acrylate While Using a Continuous Glucose Monitoring System

In the past decade, new diabetes technologies, including continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, support patients with diabetes in their daily struggle with achieving a good glucose control. However, shortly after the first CGM systems appeared on the market, also the first concerns about adverse skin reactions were raised. Most patients claimed to suffer from (sometimes severe) skin irritation, or even allergy, which they related to the (acrylate-based) adhesive part of the device. For a long time the actual substance that caused these skin reactions with, for example, the Flash Glucose Monitoring system (iscCGM; Freestyle® Libre) could not be identified; however, recently Belgian and Swedish dermatologists reported that the majority of their patients that have developed a contact-allergic while using iscCGM react sensitively to a specific acrylate, that is, isobornyl acrylate (IBOA). Subsequently they showed by means of gas chromatography-mass spectrometry that this substance is present in the case of the glucose sensor attached by an adhesive to the skin. We report three additional cases from Germany, including a 10-year-old boy, suffering from severe allergic contact dermatitis to IBOA.

Manufacturing Process Changes and Reduced Skin Irritations of an Adhesive Patch Used for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Devices

Adhesives used for continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices can cause skin irritations, which sometimes lead to abandonment of the therapy. A previous sensor manufacturing process involved two separate adhesives-one applied to the skin-facing surface of the fabric patch, and a second, ethyl cyanoacrylate-based adhesive, which secured the plastic transmitter housing to the superficial side of the patch. Our current process for attaching the transmitter housing to the fabric patch uses heatstaking, wherein the housing is heated and pressed against the patch with a specialized assembly apparatus. Heatstaking simplifies the sensor assembly process and obviates the need for the second adhesive, which may lead to lower risk of skin irritation(s) in some patients.

A Prospective Multicenter Evaluation of the Accuracy of a Novel Implanted Continuous Glucose Sensor: PRECISE II

BACKGROUND

Persistent use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) improves diabetes control in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

PRECISE II was a nonrandomized, blinded, prospective, single-arm, multicenter study that evaluated the accuracy and safety of the implantable Eversense CGM system among adult participants with T1D and T2D (NCT02647905). The primary endpoint was the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) between paired Eversense and Yellow Springs Instrument (YSI) reference measurements through 90 days postinsertion for reference glucose values from 40 to 400 mg/dL. Additional endpoints included Clarke Error Grid analysis and sensor longevity. The primary safety endpoint was the incidence of device-related or sensor insertion/removal procedure-related serious adverse events (SAEs) through 90 days postinsertion.

RESULTS

Ninety participants received the CGM system. The overall MARD value against reference glucose values was 8.8% (95% confidence interval: 8.1%-9.3%), which was significantly lower than the prespecified 20% performance goal for accuracy (P < 0.0001). Ninety-three percent of CGM values were within 20/20% of reference values over the total glucose range of 40-400 mg/dL. Clarke Error Grid analysis showed 99.3% of samples in the clinically acceptable error zones A (92.8%) and B (6.5%). Ninety-one percent of sensors were functional through day 90. One related SAE (1.1%) occurred during the study for removal of a sensor.

CONCLUSIONS

The PRECISE II trial demonstrated that the Eversense CGM system provided accurate glucose readings through the intended 90-day sensor life with a favorable safety profile.