Effects of CGM/isCGM among people with type 2 diabetes
| Reference | Study population | Age, years (mean ± SD) | Therapy | Monitoring system | Study design and follow-up | Primary endpoint | Primary results in CGM/FGM group | Change in HbA1c |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vigersky RA, 2012 [29] | 100 | 55.5 ± 9.6 | Allglucose lowering therapies (except prandial insulin) | rtCGM vs. SMBG | Prospective/two-arms; 52 weeks | HbA1c | Reduction of HbA1c at short and long-time | −1.0% ± 1.1% vs.0.5% ± 0.8% (at 12 weeks) |
| Beck RW, 2017 [30] | 158 | 60 ± 11 | MDI | rtCGM vs. usual care | RCT; 24 weeks | HbA1c | - Reduction in HbA1c- Increase of TIR | −1.1% ± 0.7% vs. −0.5% ± 0.7% (at 12 weeks)−1.0% ± 0.8% vs. −0.4% ± 0.7% (at 24 weeks) |
| Allen NA, 2008 [31] | 52 | 57 ± 13.5 | All glucose lowering therapies (except insulin) | rtCGM + phone counseling | Pilot study; 8 weeks | Changes in physical activity behavior | - Improved physical activity- Reduction in HbA1c | −1.16% ± 1.04% vs. −0.32% ± 1.02% |
| Zick R, 2007 [38] | 367 | 59.2 ± 8.2 | MDI | 72h-CGM vs. SMBG | Open-label RCT; 8 weeks | Detected hypoglycemia | - Increased detection of hypoglycemia- Reduction in HbA1c | −0.23% ± 0.64% |
| Yaron M, 2018 [54] | 101 | 66.7 ± 7.5 | MDI | isCGM vs. SMBG | RCT; 12 weeks | - Treatment satisfaction- HbA1c | - Improved QoL- Reduction in HbA1c | −0.82% vs. −0.33% (control) |
| Haak T, 2017 [55] | 224 | 59 ± 9.9 | MDI or CSII | isCGM vs. SMBG | Open-label RCT; 6 months | HbA1c | - Reduction in HbA1c < 65 years- Higher treatment satisfaction | −0.53% ± 0.09% vs. −0.20% ± 0.12% (control) |
| Midyett K, 2019 [56] | 115 | 59 ± 11.5 | OADs and MDI | isCGM vs. SMBG | Pilot study; 2 weeks | Characterization of glucose variability | - Agreement of estimated HbA1c with laboratory test- Applicability of AGP- High treatment satisfaction | NA |
P < 0.01; P < 0.05. AGP: ambulatory glucose profile; NA: not applicable; TIR: time in range