Cardiogoniometric parameters for detection of coronary artery disease at rest as a function of stenosis localization and distribution

Cardiogoniometry (CGM), a spatiotemporal electrocardiologic 5-lead method with automated analysis, may be useful in primary healthcare for detecting coronary artery disease (CAD) at rest. Our aim was to systematically develop a stenosis-specific parameter set for global CAD detection. In 793 consecutively admitted patients with presumed non-acute CAD, CGM data were collected prior to elective coronary angiography and analyzed retrospectively. 658 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria, 405 had CAD verified by coronary angiography; the 253 patients with normal coronary angiograms served as the non-CAD controls. Study patients--matched for age, BMI, and gender--were angiographically assigned to 8 stenosis-specific CAD categories or to the controls. One CGM parameter possessing significance (P < .05) and the best diagnostic accuracy was matched to one CAD category. The area under the ROC curve was .80 (global CAD versus controls). A set containing 8 stenosis-specific CGM parameters described variability of R vectors and R-T angles, spatial position and potential distribution of R/T vectors, and ST/T segment alterations. Our parameter set systematically combines CAD categories into an algorithm that detects CAD globally. Prospective validation in clinical studies is ongoing.

Influence of time point of calibration on accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring in individuals with type 1 diabetes

Abstract Background and Aims: Data on the influence of calibration on accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) are scarce. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the time point of calibration has an influence on sensor accuracy and whether this effect differs according to glycemic level. Subjects and Methods: Two CGM sensors were inserted simultaneously in the abdomen on either side of 20 individuals with type 1 diabetes. One sensor was calibrated predominantly using preprandial glucose (calibration(PRE)). The other sensor was calibrated predominantly using postprandial glucose (calibration(POST)). At minimum three additional glucose values per day were obtained for analysis of accuracy. Sensor readings were divided into four categories according to the glycemic range of the reference values (low, ≤4 mmol/L; euglycemic, 4.1-7 mmol/L; hyperglycemic I, 7.1-14 mmol/L; and hyperglycemic II, >14 mmol/L). Results: The overall mean±SEM absolute relative difference (MARD) between capillary reference values and sensor readings was 18.3±0.8% for calibration(PRE) and 21.9±1.2% for calibration(POST) (P<0.001). MARD according to glycemic range was 47.4±6.5% (low), 17.4±1.3% (euglycemic), 15.0±0.8% (hyperglycemic I), and 17.7±1.9% (hyperglycemic II) for calibration(PRE) and 67.5±9.5% (low), 24.2±1.8% (euglycemic), 15.5±0.9% (hyperglycemic I), and 15.3±1.9% (hyperglycemic II) for calibration(POST). In the low and euglycemic ranges MARD was significantly lower in calibration(PRE) compared with calibration(POST) (P=0.007 and P<0.001, respectively). Conclusions: Sensor calibration predominantly based on preprandial glucose resulted in a significantly higher overall sensor accuracy compared with a predominantly postprandial calibration. The difference was most pronounced in the hypo- and euglycemic reference range, whereas both calibration patterns were comparable in the hyperglycemic range.

Accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring during differing exercise conditions.

AIM Depending on intensity, exercise may induce a strong hormonal and metabolic response, including acid-base imbalances and changes in microcirculation, potentially interfering with the accuracy of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). The present study aimed at comparing the accuracy of the Dexcom G4 Platinum (DG4P) CGM during continuous moderate and intermittent high-intensity exercise (IHE) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1DM). METHODS Ten male individuals with well-controlled T1DM (HbA1c 7.0±0.6% [54±6mmol/mol]) inserted the DG4P sensor 2 days prior to a 90min cycling session (50% VO2peak) either with (IHE) or without (CONT) a 10s all-out sprint every 10min. Venous blood samples for reference glucose measurement were drawn every 10min and euglycemia (target 7mmol/l) was maintained using an oral glucose solution. Additionally, lactate and venous blood gas variables were determined. RESULTS Mean reference blood glucose was 7.6±0.2mmol/l during IHE and 6.7±0.2mmol/l during CONT (p<0.001). IHE resulted in significantly higher levels of lactate (7.3±0.5mmol/l vs. 2.6±0.3mmol/l, p<0.001), while pH values were significantly lower in the IHE group (7.27 vs. 7.38, p=0.001). Mean absolute relative difference (MARD) was 13.3±2.2% for IHE and 13.6±2.8% for CONT suggesting comparable accuracy (p=0.90). Using Clarke Error Grid Analysis, 100% of CGM values during both IHE and CONT were in zones A and B (IHE: 77% and 23%; CONT: 78% and 22%). CONCLUSIONS The present study revealed good and comparable accuracy of the DG4P CGM system during intermittent high intensity and continuous moderate intensity exercise, despite marked differences in metabolic conditions. This corroborates the clinical robustness of CGM under differing exercise conditions. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02068638.