Effectiveness of real-time continuous glucose monitoring to improve glycaemic control and pregnancy outcome in patients with gestational diabetes mellitus: a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Use of continuous glucose monitoring and hybrid closed-loop therapy in pregnancy

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has led to a paradigm shift in the management of pregnant women with type 1 diabetes (T1D), with improved glycaemic control, less hypoglycaemia and fewer pregnancy complications. Data on CGM use in pregnant women with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are limited. A large randomized controlled trial (RCT) on CGM use in people with T2D in pregnancy is ongoing. Small studies on CGM use in women with gestational diabetes (GDM) have suggested improved glycaemic control and better qualification when insulin is needed. However, none of these studies was powered to evaluate pregnancy outcomes. Several large RCTs are ongoing in women with GDM. In addition to CGM, other technologies, such as advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) systems have further improved glycaemic management in people with T1D. AHCL therapy adapts insulin delivery via a predictive algorithm integrated with CGM and an insulin pump. A large RCT with the AHCL CamAPS® FX demonstrated a 10% increase in time in range compared to standard insulin therapy in a pregnant population with T1D. Recently, an RCT of an AHCL system not approved for use in pregnancy (780G MiniMed) has also demonstrated additional benefits of AHCL therapy compared to standard insulin therapy, with improved time in range overnight, less hypoglycaemia and improved treatment satisfaction. More evidence is needed on the impact of AHCL therapy on maternal and neonatal outcomes and on which glycaemic targets with CGM should be used in pregnant women with T2D and GDM. We review the current evidence on the use of CGM and AHCL therapy in pregnancy.

Differences in glycemic trends due to reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy from the perspective of continuous glucose-monitoring

PURPOSE

In recent years, clinicians have focused on the importance of preventing hypoglycemia. We evaluated the impact of different reconstruction procedures after proximal gastrectomy on glycemic variability in non-diabetic patients with gastric cancer.

METHODS

This prospective observational study was conducted between April 2020 and March 2023. Flash continuous glucose-monitoring, a novel method for assessing glycemic control, was used to evaluate the glycemic profiles after gastrectomy. A flash continuous glucose-monitoring sensor was placed subcutaneously at the time of discharge, and glucose trends were evaluated for 2 weeks.

RESULTS

The anastomotic methods for proximal gastrectomy were esophagogastrostomy in 10 patients and double-tract reconstruction in 10 patients. The time below this range (glucose levels < 70 mg/dL) was significantly higher in the double-tract reconstruction group than in the esophagogastrostomy group (p = 0.049). A higher nocturnal time below this range was significantly correlated with an older age and double-tract reconstruction (p = 0.025 and p = 0.025, respectively).

CONCLUSION

These findings provide new insights into reconstruction methods after proximal gastrectomy by assessing postoperative hypoglycemia in non-diabetic patients with gastric cancer.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring Feedback in the Subsequent Development of Gestational Diabetes: A Pilot, Randomized, Controlled Trial in Pregnant Women

OBJECTIVE

 This study evaluated the effects of receiving glucose feedback from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) by intermittent scanning (unblinded group), and CGM with masked feedback (blinded group) in the subsequent development of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).

STUDY DESIGN

 This was a prospective, single-center, pilot, randomized controlled trial including n = 206 pregnant women in the first trimester of pregnancy with no prior diagnosis of type 1 or type 2 diabetes. The participants were randomized into the unblinded group or blinded group and wore the CGM in the first trimester of pregnancy (9-13 weeks), the second trimester of pregnancy (18-23 weeks), and late-second to early-third trimester (24-31 weeks). The primary outcome was GDM rate as diagnosed by the 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) at 24 to 28 weeks.

RESULTS

 Over 47 months, 206 pregnant women were enrolled at 9 to 13 weeks. The unblinded group had a higher prevalence of women who developed GDM (21.5 vs. 14.9%; p > 0.05), compared to the blinded group. In the unblinded group compared to the blinded group, plasma glucose values were higher at 1 hour (median 7.7 [interquartile range {IQR}: 6.3-9.2] vs. 7.5 [6.3-8.7]) and 2 hours (6.3 [5.8-7.7] vs. 6.2 [5.3-7.2]), but lower at 0 hour (4.2 [4.0-4.5] vs. 4.3 [4.1-4.6]; p > 0.05). All these differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

 Glucose feedback from CGM wear in the first to the third trimester of pregnancy without personalized patient education failed to alter GDM rate.

KEY POINTS

· Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is feasible for use in pregnant women.. · No significant difference in gestational diabetes rates with or without CGM feedback.. · Future clinical trials should incorporate CGM education and personalized guidance to enhance study outcomes..

Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Pregnancy

Diabetes mellitus in pregnancy is associated with adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes. Optimal glycemic control is associated with improved outcomes. Continuous glucose monitoring is a less invasive alternative to blood glucose measurements. Two types of continuous glucose monitoring are available in the market: real time and intermittently scanned. Continuous glucose monitoring is gaining popularity and is now recommended by some societies for glucose monitoring in pregnant women. In this review, we discuss the differences between the two types of continuous glucose monitoring, optimal treatment goals, and whether there is an improvement in maternal or neonatal outcomes.

The Benefits Of Continuous Glucose Monitoring In Pregnancy

Previous studies have consistently demonstrated the positive effects of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) on glycemic outcomes and complications of diabetes in people with type 1 diabetes. Guidelines now consider CGM to be an essential and cost-effective device for managing type 1 diabetes. As a result, insurance coverage for it is available. Evidence supporting CGM continues to grow and expand to broader populations, such as pregnant people with type 1 diabetes, people with type 2 diabetes treated only with basal insulin therapy, and even type 2 diabetes that does not require insulin treatment. However, despite the significant risk of hyperglycemia in pregnancy, which leads to complications in more than half of affected newborns, CGM indications and insurance coverage for those patients are unresolved. In this review article, we discuss the latest evidence for using CGM to offer glycemic control and reduce perinatal complications, along with its cost-effectiveness in pregestational type 1 and type 2 diabetes and gestational diabetes mellitus. In addition, we discuss future prospects for CGM coverage and indications based on this evidence.

New Developments, Challenges and Open Questions in Diagnosis and Treatment of Gestational Diabetes Mellitus

The prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is increasing alongside a rising maternal age at conception, an increasing number of people making unhealthy lifestyle choices and, especially, an increasing pregestational body weight [...].

Dynamics of glucose levels after Billroth I versus Roux-en-Y reconstruction in patients who undergo distal gastrectomy

PURPOSE

Recent studies have highlighted the importance of understanding trends in blood glucose levels. We examined the differences in blood glucose fluctuations according to the reconstruction method used after distal gastrectomy (DG) in patients with non-diabetic gastric cancer (GC).

METHODS

Sixty-one patients who underwent DG followed by either Billroth 1 (B1) or Roux-en-Y (R-Y) reconstruction were enrolled in this study. We used flash continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), a new technique for assessing glycemic control, to document the post-gastrectomy glycemic profile. Immediately before discharge, a CGM sensor was placed subcutaneously to evaluate blood glucose trends for 2 weeks.

RESULTS

The coefficient of variation of glucose levels was significantly higher in the Roux-en-Y (R-Y) group than in the Billroth I (B-I) group (p = 0.0260). The time below range (TBR, glucose levels of < 70 mg/dL) was also significantly higher in the R-Y group (p = 0.0115). Logistic regression analysis revealed that preoperative casual glucose levels of < 100 mg/dL and R-Y reconstruction were independently correlated with risk factors for a postoperative nocturnal TBR of > 30% (p = 0.006 and 0.042, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our findings provide new insights into the post-DG reconstruction method selected for patients with non-diabetic gastric cancer by assessing postoperative blood glucose fluctuations using flash CGM.

Commentary: Implications of SARS-Cov-2 infection for pregnancy with diabetes: achievements and open questions for feto-maternal medicine

SARS-Cov-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Coronavirus 2) infection confers a non-negligible risk for younger pregnant women with diabetes, which is still less well investigated. This topic was recently addressed by a systematic scoping review in BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, aiming to summarize the complex interaction between SARS-Cov-2 infection, pregnancy and diabetes. This commentary will summarize and discuss the main findings of this article and its implications for future research.