医学
连续血糖监测
糖尿病
梅德林
重症监护医学
内分泌学
1型糖尿病
政治学
法学
作者
Thomas Danne,Revital Nimri,Tadej Battelino,Richard M. Bergenstal,Kelly L. Close,J. Hans DeVries,Satish K. Garg,Lutz Heinemann,Irl B. Hirsch,Stephanie A. Amiel,Roy W. Beck,Emanuele Bosi,Bruce A. Buckingham,Claudio Cobelli,Eyal Dassau,Francis J. Doyle,Simon Heller,Roman Hovorka,Weiping Jia,Timothy W. Jones
出处
期刊:Diabetes Care
[American Diabetes Association]
日期:2017-11-10
卷期号:40 (12): 1631-1640
被引量:2012
摘要
Measurement of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) has been the traditional method for assessing glycemic control. However, it does not reflect intra- and interday glycemic excursions that may lead to acute events (such as hypoglycemia) or postprandial hyperglycemia, which have been linked to both microvascular and macrovascular complications. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), either from real-time use (rtCGM) or intermittently viewed (iCGM), addresses many of the limitations inherent in HbA1c testing and self-monitoring of blood glucose. Although both provide the means to move beyond the HbA1c measurement as the sole marker of glycemic control, standardized metrics for analyzing CGM data are lacking. Moreover, clear criteria for matching people with diabetes to the most appropriate glucose monitoring methodologies, as well as standardized advice about how best to use the new information they provide, have yet to be established. In February 2017, the Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes (ATTD) Congress convened an international panel of physicians, researchers, and individuals with diabetes who are expert in CGM technologies to address these issues. This article summarizes the ATTD consensus recommendations and represents the current understanding of how CGM results can affect outcomes.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI