Download PDF
Tierarztl Prax Ausg K Kleintiere Heimtiere 2020; 48(05): 330-338
DOI: 10.1055/a-1239-4739
Original Article

Flash glucose monitoring in diabetic dogs: a feasible method for evaluating glycemic control

Flash-Glukose-Monitoring bei diabetischen Hunden: eine praktikable Methode zur Evaluierung der glykämischen Kontrolle
Florian K. Zeugswetter
Diabetes mellitus, sensorbasiertes Glukosemonitoring, glykämische Variabilität, MAGE
,
Andrea Sellner
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Gegenstand und Ziel Zur Reduktion der klinischen Symptome und zur Verhinderung von lebensbedrohlichen Komplikationen sind bei Hunden mit Diabetes mellitus individualisierte Behandlungsstrategien und regelmäßige Kontrollen notwendig. Sieben bis 14 Tage nach jeder Anpassung der Insulindosierung und danach monatlich wird das Erstellen von Blutglukose-Tagesprofilen empfohlen. Im Jahr 2016 wurde ein herstellerkalibriertes Gerät zur kontinuierlichen Glukosemessung als Alternative zur Messung mittels Glukometer vorgeschlagen. Ziel dieser Arbeit war, die Erfahrungen mit dieser neuen Technologie zusammenzufassen und zu zeigen, dass bereits die erste Messperiode in Kombination mit einfachen Regeln eine Verbesserung der glykämischen Kontrolle ermöglicht.

Material und Methoden Das elektronische Datensystem der endokrinen Einheit der Klinik wurde retrospektiv auf diabetische Hunde mit Flash-Glukose-Monitoring durchsucht. Bei multipler Sensorapplikation fand nur der erste Sensor Berücksichtigung. Die Aufzeichnungen von Tag A (1. Tag nach Sensorapplikation) wurden mit den Werten von Tag B (letzter Tag vor dem Sensorversagen) verglichen und alle Besitzer wurden gebeten, einen standardisierten Fragebogen auszufüllen.

Ergebnisse In die Studie wurden 24 Hunde mit einem Gewicht von 3,4 bis 36 kg eingeschlossen. Obwohl das Klickgeräusch bei der Platzierung des Sensors die meisten Hunde irritierte, beurteilten Anwender die Applikation als einfach und für die Hunde schmerzlos. Eine kurze Pause nach der lokalen Desinfektion und die Fixierung des Sensors mit einer Pinzette verhinderten ein vorzeitiges Ablösen des Sensors beim Wegziehen des Applikators. Obwohl bei 80 % der Hunde milde bis moderate Hautirritationen beobachtet wurden, waren 95 % der Besitzer mit dieser Form des Monitorings hoch zufrieden. Die mittleren und maximalen Glukosekonzentrationen (p = 0,043, p = 0,003) sowie die Glukosewerte ≥ 11,1 mmol/l (p = 0,032) nahmen von Tag A zu Tag B ab, während die Parameter der glykämischen Variabilität unverändert blieben.

Schlussfolgerung und klinische Relevanz Flash-Glukose-Monitoring ist eine praktikable, nebenwirkungsarme Methode mit hoher Besitzerzufriedenheit, mit der sich die glykämische Kontrolle bei diabetischen Hunden verbessern lässt.

Abstract

Objective To alleviate clinical signs and avoid life-threatening complications in dogs with diabetes mellitus, individualized treatment plans and frequent reassessments are necessary. Performing blood glucose profiles every 7–14 days following insulin adjustments and monthly thereafter, is recommended. In 2016, a factory calibrated continuous blood glucose monitoring system was presented as a possible alternative to glucometer readings. The objectives of this study were to summarize the experiences with this new technology and to show, that in combination with simple rules, already the first measurement period can improve glycemic control.

Material and methods The electronic database of the endocrine unit of the clinic was retrospectively searched for diabetic dogs with flash glucose monitoring. In case of repeated sensor implantations, only the first sensor was considered. The recordings of day A (starting at midnight after sensor placement) were compared to the measurements of day B (day before sensor failure) and all owners were contacted to fill in a standardized questionnaire.

Results The final study population consisted of 24 dogs weighing 3.4 to 36 kg. Although the clicking noise during sensor placement irritated most dogs, the application was considered easy and painless. Waiting for disinfectant evaporation and fixation of the sensor disc with forceps helped to avoid sensor detachment when removing the application device. Although transient mild to moderate skin irritations were observed in 80 % of the dogs, 95 % of the owners were highly satisfied with this new monitoring technology. Mean and maximum glucose (p = 0.043, p = 0.003) as well as glucose readings ≥ 11.1 mmol/l (p = 0.032) decreased from day A to B, whereas markers of glycemic variability did not change.

Conclusion and clinical relevance Flash glucose monitoring is a feasible, safe method with high user satisfaction and offers a possibility to improve glycemic control in diabetic dogs.

Schlüsselwörter

Diabetes mellitus - sensorbasiertes Glukosemonitoring - glykämische Variabilität - MAGE

Key words

Diabetes mellitus - sensor-based glucose monitoring - glycemic variability - MAGE


Publication History

Received: 19 May 2020

Accepted: 21 July 2020

Article published online:
21 October 2020

© 2020. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Behrend E, Holford A, Lathan P. et al. 2018 AAHA diabetes management guidelinesfor dogs and cats. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2018; 54 (01) 1-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Rucinsky R, Cook A, Haley S. AAHA diabetes management guidelines for cats and dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2010; 46: 215-224
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Casella M, Wess G, Hässig M. et al. Home monitoring of blood glucose concentration by owners of diabetic dogs. J Small Anim Pract 2003; 44 (07) 298-305
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Cartwright JA, Cobb M, Dunning MD. Pilot study evaluating the monitoring of canine diabetes mellitus in primary care practice. Vet Rec Open 2019; 6: e000250 doi:10.1136/vetreco-2017–000250
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Corradini S, Pilosio B, Dondi F. et al. Accuracy of a flash glucose monitoring system in diabetic dogs. J Vet Int Med 2016; 30: 983-988
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Mazze RS, Lucido D, Langer O. et al. Ambulatory glucose profile. Representation of verified self-monitored blood glucose data. Diabet Care 1987; 10: 111-117
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Smith SA. The hypoglycemic crisis. Proc Int Vet Emerg Crit Care Symp, San Diego, California 2004; 1-5
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Del Baldo F, Magna L, Dondi F. et al. Comparison of serum fructosamine and glycated hemoglobin values for assessment of glycemic control in dogs with diabetes mellitus. Am J Vet Res 2019; 81: 233-242
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Monnier L, Colette C. Glycemic variability. Should we and can we prevent it?. Diabet Care 2008; 31: 150-154
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Service J. Glucose variability. Diabetes 2013; 62: 1398-1404
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Tay J, Thompson CH, Brinkworth GD. Glycemic variability: assessing glycemia differently and the implications for dietary management of diabetes. Annu Rev Nutr 2015; 35: 389-424
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Malerba E, Cattani C, DelBaldo F. et al. Accuracy of a flash glucose monitoring system in dogs with diabetic ketoacidosis. J Vet Int Med 2018; 1-9 DOI: 10.1111/jvim.15657.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Tamamoto T, Kumano M, Igarashi H. et al. Clinical usefulness of flash glucose monitoring system in dogs with diabetes mellitus. J Vet Sci Med Diagn 2019; 8: 4
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Dunn TC, Xu Y, Hayter G. et al. Real-world flash glucose monitoring patterns and associations between self-monitoring frequency and glycemic measures: A European analysis of over 60 million glucose tests. Diabet Res Clin Pract 2018; 137: 37-46
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Pyl J, Dendooven E, Van I Eekelen. et al. Prevalence and prevention of contact dermatitis caused by FreeStyle Libre: A monocentric experience. Diabet Care 2020; 43 (04) 918-920 DOI: 10.2337/dc19–1354.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Idowu O, Heading K. Hypoglycaemia in dogs: Causes, management, and diagnosis. Can J Vet Res 2018; 59: 642-649
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Argento NB. Flash forward, with caution. Diabet Med 2018; 35 (08) 1131-1132
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Monnier L, Mas E, Ginet C. et al. Activation of oxidative stress by acute glucose fluctuations compared with sustained chronic hyperglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. J Am Med Assoc 2006; 295 (14) 1681-1687
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Ceriello A, Esposito K, Piconi L. et al. Oscillating glucose is more deleterious to endothelial function and oxidative stress than mean glucose in normal and type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes 2008; 57 (05) 1349-1354
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Nusca A, Tuccinardi D, Albano M. et al. Glycemic variability in the development of cardiovascular complications in diabetes. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2018; 34: e3047 DOI: 101002/dmrr.3047.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Lin CC, Li CI, Yang SY. et al. Variation of fasting plasma glucose: a predictor of mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes. Am J Med 2012; 125: 416.e9-416.e18
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Sartore G, Chilelli NC, Burlina S. et al. The importance of HbA1c and glucose variability in patients with type 1 and 2 diabetes: outcome of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). Acta Diabetol 2012; 49 (Suppl. 01) 153-160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Ayano-Takahara S, Ikeda K, Fujimoto S. et al. Glycemic variability is associated with quality of life and treatment satisfaction in patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabet Care 2015; 38: e1-e2 DOI: 10.2337/dc14–1801.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Suh S, Kim JH. Glycemic variability: How do we measure it and why is it important?. Diabetes Metab J 2015; 39: 273-282
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Fleeman LM, Rand JS. Evaluation of day-to-day variability of serial blood glucose concentration curves in diabetic dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2003; 222 (03) 317-321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ruaux CG, Carney PC, Suchodolski JS. et al. Estimates of biological variation in routinely measured biochemical analytes in clinically healthy dogs. Vet Clin Pathol 2012; 41: 541-547
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Rizzo MR, Barbieri M, Marfella R. et al. Reduction of oxidative stress and inflammation by blunting daily acute glucose fluctuations in patients with type 2 diabetes: role of dipeptidyl peptidase-IV inhibition. Diabet Care 2012; 35: 2076-2082
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Su G, Mi SH, Tao H. et al. Impact of admission glycemic variability, glucose and glycosylated hemoglobine on major adverse cardiac events after acute myocardial infarction. Diabet Care 2013; 36: 1026-1032
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Wang Z, Zhao X, Dorje T. et al. Glycemic variability predicts cardiovascular complications in acute myocardial infarction patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Int J Cardiol 2014; 172: 498-500
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Su G, Mi SH, Tao H.. et al. Association of glycemic variability and the presence and severity of coronary artery disease in type 2 diabetes. Cardiovasc Diabetol 2011; 10: 19
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Hammoud T, Tanguay JF, Bourassa MG. Management of coronary artery disease: therapeutic options in patients with diabetes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000; 36: 2035-2038
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Salkind SJ, Huizenga R, Fonda SJ. et al. Glycemic variability in nondiabetic morbidly obese persons: results of an observational study and review of the literature. J Diabet Sci Technol 2014; 8 (05) 1042-1047
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Ratna BS, Subashini R, Unnikrishnan R. et al. Use of Freestyle ProTM flash glucose monitoring system in different clinical situations at a diabetes center. J Assoc Phys India 2017; 65: 18-23
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Ying L, Ma X, Lu J. et al. Fulminant type 1 diabetes: The clinical and continuous glucose characteristics in Chinese patients. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 2019; 46: 806-812
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Lin YH, Huang YY, Chen HY. et al. Impact of carbohydrate on glucose variability in patients with type 1 diabetes assessed through professional continuous glucose monitoring: a retrospective study. Diabetes Ther 2019; 10: 2289-2304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Beam S, Correa MT, Davidson MG. A retrospective-cohort study on the development of cataracts in dogs with diabetes mellitus: 200 cases. Vet Ophthalmol 1999; 2: 169-172
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Sato S, Takahashi Y, Wyman M. et al. Progression of sugar cataract in the dog. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci 1991; 32: 1925-1931
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Fleeman LM, Rand JS, Morton JM. Pharmacokinetics and pharmadynamics of porcine insulin zinc suspension in eight diabetic dogs. Vet Rec 2009; 164: 232-237
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Oda H, Mori A, Ishii S. et al. Time-action profiles of insulin degludec in healthy dogs and its effects on glycemic control in diabetic dogs. J Vet Med Sci 2018; 80: 1720-1723
    PubMedGoogle Scholar