scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Kyuhan Lee

Bio: Kyuhan Lee is an academic researcher from University of Manchester. The author has co-authored 1 publications.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors evaluated the impact of FGM and RT-CGM use on glycaemic outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) under routine clinical care.

3 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors developed a nonenzymatic portable glucose sensor on a graphene paste printed on cellulose cloth, which achieved a sensitivity in the range of 0.1 to 1 mM glucose, with a sensitivity of 1082.5 ± 4.7% µA mM−1 cm−2 on Cu2O coated glassy carbon electrode.

10 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors compared real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) and intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM), and found that rtCGM users had a significantly greater HbA1c benefit compared to isCGM (adjusted difference, -3 mmol/mol [95% CI, -5 to -1]; -0.5 to 0.1]; p = 0.04).
Abstract: Real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM) and intermittently scanned CGM (isCGM) have both been shown to improve glycaemic outcomes in people with T1D. The aim of this study was to compare real-world glycaemic outcomes at 6-12 months in a propensity score matched cohort of CGM naïve adults with T1D who initiated a rtCGM or an isCGM. Among the matched rtCGM and isCGM cohorts (n = 143/cohort), rtCGM users had a significantly greater HbA1c benefit compared to isCGM users (adjusted difference, -3 mmol/mol [95% CI, -5 to -1]; -0.3% [95% CI, -0.5 to -0.1]; p = 0.01). There was a significantly greater lowering of HbA1c for rtCGM compared to isCGM when baseline HbA1c was <69 mmol/mol (8.5%) (adjusted difference, -4 mmol/mol [95% CI, -7 mmol/mol to -2 mmol/mol]; -0.4% [95% CI, -0.6% to -0.2%]; p < 0.001), and in MDI users (adjusted difference, -3 mmol/mol [95% CI, -6 mmol/mol to -0 mmol/mol]; -0.3% [95% CI -0.5% to 0.0%], p = 0.04). The rtCGM cohort had significantly greater time in range (58.3 ± 16.1% vs. 54.5 ± 17.1%, p = 0.03), lower time below range (2.1 ± 2.7% vs. 6.1 ± 5.0%, p < 0.001) and lower glycaemic variability compared to the isCGM cohort. In this real-world analysis of adults with T1D, rtCGM users had a significantly greater reduction in HbA1c at 6-12 months compared to isCGM, and significantly greater time in range, lower time below range and lower glycaemic variability, compared to a matched cohort of isCGM users.

3 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors focus on providing additional education to CGM users, more frequent touch-base virtual reviews and increasing access to hybrid closed-loop insulin pump therapy, highlighting the challenges in optimising the use of CGM.
Abstract: The American Diabetes Association/European Association for the Study of Diabetes recently recommend the preferential use of continuous glucose monitoring(CGM) over self-monitoring of blood glucose for the management of type 1 diabetes (T1DM). For most adults with T1DM, the recommended target time in range is > 70% with < 4% time below range. In Ireland, CGM use has become increasingly popular since 2021. We aimed to audit adult CGM use and analyse CGM metrics in our cohort of adults with diabetes attending a tertiary diabetes centre. People with diabetes who were using DEXCOM G6 CGM devices, and sharing their data with the healthcare team on the DEXCOM CLARITY for healthcare professionals platform were included in the audit. Clinical information, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and CGM metrics were gathered retrospectively from medical records and the DEXCOM CLARITY platform. Data were available for 119 CGM users, 96.9% with T1DM, median age 36 years (IQR = 20) and median diabetes duration 17 years (IQR = 20). Fifty-three per cent of the cohort was male. Mean time in range was 56.2% (SD = 19.2) and mean time below range was 2.3% (SD = 2.6). Mean HbA1c in CGM users was 56.7 mmol/mol (SD = 13.1). This represented a decrease of 6.7 mmol/mol compared to the last HbA1c measurements available pre-commencement of CGM (p ≤ 0.0001, CI 4.4–8.9). The percentage of people in this cohort with a HbA1c < 53 mmol/mol was 40.6% (n = 39/96), compared to 17.5% (n = 18/103) pre-commencement of CGM. Our study highlights the challenges in optimising the use of CGM. Our team aims to focus on providing additional education to CGM users, more frequent touch-base virtual reviews and increasing access to hybrid closed-loop insulin pump therapy.