Role of continuous glucose monitoring in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk: an expert-based multidisciplinary Delphi consensus.
Cardiovascular outcome
Continuous glucose monitoring
Delphi method
Glucometrics
Glycaemic variability
Time in range
Journal
Cardiovascular diabetology
ISSN: 1475-2840
Titre abrégé: Cardiovasc Diabetol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101147637
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 08 2022
27 08 2022
Historique:
received:
13
03
2022
accepted:
14
07
2022
entrez:
27
8
2022
pubmed:
28
8
2022
medline:
31
8
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) shows in more detail the glycaemic pattern of diabetic subjects and provides several new parameters ("glucometrics") to assess patients' glycaemia and consensually guide treatment. A better control of glucose levels might result in improvement of clinical outcome and reduce disease complications. This study aimed to gather an expert consensus on the clinical and prognostic use of CGM in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk or with heart disease. A list of 22 statements concerning type of patients who can benefit from CGM, prognostic impact of CGM in diabetic patients with heart disease, CGM use during acute cardiovascular events and educational issues of CGM were developed. Using a two-round Delphi methodology, the survey was distributed online to 42 Italian experts (21 diabetologists and 21 cardiologists) who rated their level of agreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was predefined as more than 66% of the panel agreeing/disagreeing with any given statement. Forty experts (95%) answered the survey. Every statement achieved a positive consensus. In particular, the panel expressed the feeling that CGM can be prognostically relevant for every diabetic patient (70%) and that is clinically useful also in the management of those with type 2 diabetes not treated with insulin (87.5%). The assessment of time in range (TIR), glycaemic variability (GV) and hypoglycaemic/hyperglycaemic episodes were considered relevant in the management of diabetic patients with heart disease (92.5% for TIR, 95% for GV, 97.5% for time spent in hypoglycaemia) and can improve the prognosis of those with ischaemic heart disease (100% for hypoglycaemia, 90% for hyperglycaemia) or with heart failure (87.5% for hypoglycaemia, 85% for TIR, 87.5% for GV). The experts retained that CGM can be used and can impact the short- and long-term prognosis during an acute cardiovascular event. Lastly, CGM has a recognized educational role for diabetic subjects. According to this Delphi consensus, the clinical and prognostic use of CGM in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk is promising and deserves dedicated studies to confirm the experts' feelings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) shows in more detail the glycaemic pattern of diabetic subjects and provides several new parameters ("glucometrics") to assess patients' glycaemia and consensually guide treatment. A better control of glucose levels might result in improvement of clinical outcome and reduce disease complications. This study aimed to gather an expert consensus on the clinical and prognostic use of CGM in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk or with heart disease.
METHODS
A list of 22 statements concerning type of patients who can benefit from CGM, prognostic impact of CGM in diabetic patients with heart disease, CGM use during acute cardiovascular events and educational issues of CGM were developed. Using a two-round Delphi methodology, the survey was distributed online to 42 Italian experts (21 diabetologists and 21 cardiologists) who rated their level of agreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was predefined as more than 66% of the panel agreeing/disagreeing with any given statement.
RESULTS
Forty experts (95%) answered the survey. Every statement achieved a positive consensus. In particular, the panel expressed the feeling that CGM can be prognostically relevant for every diabetic patient (70%) and that is clinically useful also in the management of those with type 2 diabetes not treated with insulin (87.5%). The assessment of time in range (TIR), glycaemic variability (GV) and hypoglycaemic/hyperglycaemic episodes were considered relevant in the management of diabetic patients with heart disease (92.5% for TIR, 95% for GV, 97.5% for time spent in hypoglycaemia) and can improve the prognosis of those with ischaemic heart disease (100% for hypoglycaemia, 90% for hyperglycaemia) or with heart failure (87.5% for hypoglycaemia, 85% for TIR, 87.5% for GV). The experts retained that CGM can be used and can impact the short- and long-term prognosis during an acute cardiovascular event. Lastly, CGM has a recognized educational role for diabetic subjects.
CONCLUSIONS
According to this Delphi consensus, the clinical and prognostic use of CGM in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk is promising and deserves dedicated studies to confirm the experts' feelings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36030229
doi: 10.1186/s12933-022-01598-2
pii: 10.1186/s12933-022-01598-2
pmc: PMC9420264
doi:
Substances chimiques
Blood Glucose
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
164Investigateurs
Angelo Avogaro
(A)
Federico Bertuzzi
(F)
Enzo Bonora
(E)
Claudio Borghi
(C)
Raffaella Buzzetti
(R)
Stefano Carugo
(S)
Davide Capodanno
(D)
Agostino Consoli
(A)
Antonio Conti
(A)
Rossella Danesi
(R)
Paolo Bartolo
(P)
Gaetano Maria De Ferrari
(GM)
Stefano Favale
(S)
Carlo Giorda
(C)
Francesco Giorgino
(F)
Angela Girelli
(A)
Paolo Golino
(P)
Francesco Grigioni
(F)
Ciro Indolfi
(C)
Concetta Irace
(C)
Elisabetta Lovati
(E)
Ada Maffettone
(A)
Maria Masulli
(M)
Fabrizio G Oliva
(FG)
Luigi Oltrona Visconti
(L)
Emanuela Orsi
(E)
Uberto Pagotto
(U)
Leonardo Paloscia
(L)
Gianfranco Parati
(G)
Pasquale Perrone
(P)
Gianfranco Piccirillo
(G)
Paolo Pozzilli
(P)
Giuseppe Pugliese
(G)
Francesco Purrello
(F)
Flavio Ribichini
(F)
Andrea Rubboli
(A)
Michele Senni
(M)
Roberto Trevisan
(R)
Claudio Tubili
(C)
Massimo Uguccioni
(M)
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Diabetes Care. 2019 Jul;42(7):1305-1311
pubmed: 31048409
Diabetes Care. 2016 May;39(5):686-93
pubmed: 26861924
JACC Heart Fail. 2015 Feb;3(2):136-45
pubmed: 25660838
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2020 Sep 18;7:570553
pubmed: 33195459
Diabetes Ther. 2017 Feb;8(1):55-73
pubmed: 28000140
Diabetes Care. 2019 Aug;42(8):1593-1603
pubmed: 31177185
Arch Intern Med. 2004 May 10;164(9):982-8
pubmed: 15136307
N Engl J Med. 2000 Feb 10;342(6):381-9
pubmed: 10666428
N Engl J Med. 1993 Sep 30;329(14):977-86
pubmed: 8366922
Am J Cardiol. 2014 Oct 15;114(8):1136-44
pubmed: 25150136
US Endocrinol. 2012 Summer;8(1):27-29
pubmed: 24312136
Diabetes. 2014 May;63(5):1738-47
pubmed: 24757202
Lancet. 2016 Nov 5;388(10057):2254-2263
pubmed: 27634581
Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2022 Feb;38(2):e3484
pubmed: 34240534
N Engl J Med. 2020 Oct 8;383(15):1413-1424
pubmed: 32865377
Diabetes Care. 2017 Dec;40(12):1614-1621
pubmed: 29070577
Circulation. 2008 May 13;117(19):2544-65
pubmed: 18391114
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005 Jul 5;46(1):178-80
pubmed: 15992655
Lancet. 1998 Sep 12;352(9131):837-53
pubmed: 9742976
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019 Mar;7(3):221-230
pubmed: 30115599
Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2019 May;29(5):421-431
pubmed: 30952574
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1994 Dec;79(6):1659-62
pubmed: 7989471
Eur Cardiol. 2021 Mar 30;16:e11
pubmed: 33897837
N Engl J Med. 2020 Feb 13;382(7):679-682
pubmed: 32053308
Diabetes Technol Ther. 2014 May;16(5):303-9
pubmed: 24299302
Circ J. 2012;76(11):2690-6
pubmed: 22864290
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010 Jan;3(1):24-31
pubmed: 19846730
Nature. 2001 Dec 13;414(6865):813-20
pubmed: 11742414
Intensive Care Med. 2011 Apr;37(4):583-93
pubmed: 21279326
Circulation. 2004 Jul 13;110(2):214-9
pubmed: 15197140
Lancet. 1998 Sep 12;352(9131):854-65
pubmed: 9742977
BMJ. 2011 Jul 26;343:d4169
pubmed: 21791495
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2018 Mar;137:37-46
pubmed: 29278709
JAMA. 2006 Apr 12;295(14):1681-7
pubmed: 16609090
Am Heart J. 2010 Dec;160(6):1170-7
pubmed: 21146674
JAMA. 2009 Apr 15;301(15):1556-64
pubmed: 19366775
Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2021 Jun 30;22(2):301-314
pubmed: 34258899
Diabetes. 2008 May;57(5):1349-54
pubmed: 18299315
Eur J Heart Fail. 2017 Jan;19(1):43-53
pubmed: 27653447
Diabetes Care. 2000 Dec;23(12):1830-4
pubmed: 11128361
Lancet. 2009 May 23;373(9677):1765-72
pubmed: 19465231
JAMA. 2002 May 15;287(19):2563-9
pubmed: 12020338
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2015 Sep;3(9):723-33
pubmed: 26071884
Diabetes Care. 2019 Apr;42(4):674-681
pubmed: 30728222
Diabetes Care. 2022 Jan 1;45(Suppl 1):S97-S112
pubmed: 34964871
Diabetes Care. 2017 Dec;40(12):1631-1640
pubmed: 29162583
Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2021 Jan 7;20(1):9
pubmed: 33413392
N Engl J Med. 2019 Nov 21;381(21):1995-2008
pubmed: 31535829
J Adv Nurs. 2000 Oct;32(4):1008-15
pubmed: 11095242
Adv Ther. 2019 Mar;36(3):579-596
pubmed: 30659511
BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2021 Mar;9(1):
pubmed: 33762313
Diabetes Care. 2019 Jul;42(7):1178-1184
pubmed: 31036546
Circulation. 2015 Dec 15;132(24):2345-50
pubmed: 26667098
Circulation. 2001 Jan 23;103(3):346-7
pubmed: 11157682
Diabetes Ther. 2020 Jan;11(1):83-95
pubmed: 31673972
Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2021 Apr 09;13(1):42
pubmed: 33836819
BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2017 Apr 6;5(1):e000342
pubmed: 28611921
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013 Jul 23;62(4):263-71
pubmed: 23684677
Anesthesiology. 2006 Aug;105(2):244-52
pubmed: 16871057