Published online Aug 10, 2013. doi: 10.5317/wjog.v2.i3.42
Revised: April 21, 2013
Accepted: May 18, 2013
Published online: August 10, 2013
Processing time: 205 Days and 19.9 Hours
Intrapartum maternal normoglycemia seems to play an important role in the prevention of adverse perinatal, maternal and neonatal outcomes. Several glucose monitoring protocols have been developed, aiming to achieve a tight glucose monitoring and control. Depending on the type of diabetes and the optimal or suboptimal glycemic control, the treatment options include fasting status of the parturient, frequent monitoring of capillary blood glucose, intravenous dextrose infusion and subcutaneous or intravenous use of insulin. Continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) is a relatively new technology that measures interstitial glucose at very short time intervals over a specific period of time. The resulting profile provides a more comprehensive measure of glycemic excursions than intermittent home blood glucose monitoring. Results of studies applying the CGMS technology in patients with or without diabetes mellitus (DM) have revealed new insights in glucose metabolism. Moreover, CGMS have a potential role in the improvement of glycemic control during pregnancy and labor, which may lead to a decrease in perinatal morbidity and mortality. In conclusion, the use of CGMS, with its important technical advantages compared to the conventional way of monitoring, may lead into a more etiological intrapartum management of both the mother and her fetus/infant in pregnancies complicated with DM.
Core tip: In pregnancies complicated with diabetes, intrapartum maternal normoglycemia seems to play an important role in the prevention of adverse perinatal outcomes. Several glucose monitoring protocols have been developed, aiming to achieve a tight glucose monitoring and control intrapartum. The continuous glucose monitoring system is a relatively new technology; its intrapartum application in pregnancies complicated with diabetes is feasible, allows for a closer observation of glucose concentrations and is expected to lead to a more etiological management of both the mother and her fetus/infant.
- Citation: Harizopoulou VC, Tsiartas P, Goulis DG, Vavilis D, Grimbizis G, Theodoridis TD, Tarlatzis BC. Intrapartum application of the continuous glucose monitoring system in pregnancies complicated with diabetes: A review and feasibility study. World J Obstet Gynecol 2013; 2(3): 42-46
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-6220/full/v2/i3/42.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5317/wjog.v2.i3.42
The incidence of diabetes mellitus (DM) continues to rise worldwide[1,2]. Obviously, this increase affects the incidence of hyperglycemia in pregnancy[3]. The co-existence of DM and pregnancy, commonly encountered in clinical practice, is important both from a pathophysiology and clinical point of view as it is associated with short and long-term morbidity and mortality for the foetus/infant and the mother. Generally, it is accepted that tight glycemic control during pregnancy and labor leads to a decrease in perinatal morbidity and mortality. Pregnancies complicated with DM are treated intrapartum under this principle.
The continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) is a relatively new technology that measures interstitial glucose every 1 to 10 min for a maximum of 3 to 6 d, depending on the monitor used. The resulting profile provides a more comprehensive measure of glycemic excursions than intermittent home blood glucose monitoring. Clinical indications for CGMS use include conditions where tight control is crucial[4].
The aim of this review is to present the intrapartum glucose monitoring protocols in pregnancies complicated with DM. The potential role of CGMS as a tool in the achievement of the optimal glycemic control intrapartum is discussed in detail.
Although the need for normoglycemia during pregnancies complicated with DM has been well established[5-8], the importance and need for intrapartum normoglycemia arise from epidemiological studies only[9-13]. Poor glycemic control intrapartum is associated with adverse maternal (hypoglycemia, ketoacidosis) and neonatal (hypoglycemia, ketoacidosis and respiratory distress syndrome) outcomes[14]. Neonatal hyperglycemia, specifically, has an impact not only on immediate morbidity but also seems to affect long-term neurological development[14].
It is generally accepted that the main target of intrapartum management in pregnancies complicated with DM is to achieve optimal glycemic control. On the other hand, the definition of “optimal” remains a matter of debate. In the literature, there is a great variance in the recommended targets for blood glucose control during labor, ranging from 4.0-6.5 mmol/L[15] to 4.0-8.0 mmol/L[16] and 3.88-6.5 mmol/L[17].
Different protocols for glycemic control during labor have been developed worldwide. The controversies in the literature concerning the management of pregnancies complicated with DM in the delivery room led to the adoption of different local policies[18-23]. Depending on the type of DM and the optimal or suboptimal glycemic control, the treatment options include fasting status of the parturient, frequent monitoring of capillary blood glucose, intravenous dextrose infusion and subcutaneous or intravenous use of insulin.
Most of the protocols are based on the intravenous dextrose and insulin infusion when the concentration of blood glucose is not maintained in the desired range. The insulin infusion rate usually depends on capillary blood glucose, which is monitored hourly during labor[17,23-25]. Specific algorithms that include simultaneous adjustment of both dextrose and insulin infusion rates during labor have been published. These are considered as the standard of care since their efficacy and safety in reducing the risk for maternal hypoglycemia or ketoacidosis have been tested in many studies[23,26-28].
Insights into the pathophysiology and the intrapartum management of pregnancies complicated with insulin-requiring DM suggest that the amount of insulin required during the onset of labor is often zero; thus, it seems that the probability of ketoacidosis due to the prolonged fasting status constitutes a real problem[20-29].
The main clinical indications of the CGMS include: (1) adjustment of anti-diabetic treatment; (2) quantitative assessment of the effect of anti-diabetic therapy; (3) assessment of the effect of lifestyle changes in glycemic control; (4) situations where strict glycemic control is particularly important; (5) diagnosis and prevention of hypoglycemia, particularly during sleep; and (6) diagnosis and prevention of post-prandial hyperglycemia[4,30,31].
The most common use of CGMS is during the adjustment of anti-diabetic therapy towards a better glycemic control[30]. These adjustments include modification of insulin dosage before meals, change of the type of insulin administered, changes in the composition of the diet in carbohydrates, decrease in the dose of insulin during periods of intense physical exercise and changes in diet or DM treatment during the night in an attempt to avoid the “dawn phenomenon”[4,31]. CGMS have been also used in clinical trials concerning anti-diabetic agents in an attempt to obtain accurate data about their effect on patients’ glycemic profile[32]. CGMS have been used to monitor glucose levels not only in patients with DM, but also in other populations with high risk of hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia. Much attention has been paid to patients with cystic fibrosis[33,34] who face an increased risk of developing DM, in patients hospitalized in intensive care units[35] who are at a high risk of hypoglycemia[36,37] or hyperglycemia[35,38] and in patients with glycogen storage diseases[39] who also face an increased risk of hypoglycemia.
The aim of a very recent publication of a task force of experts appointed by the Endocrine Society was to formulate practice guidelines for determining settings where patients are most likely to benefit from the use of CGMS[40]. Indications and implications of the use of CGMS in the perinatal and intrapartum setting were not evaluated and so still need to be assessed.
Although publications on the use of CGMS in pregnancies with or without DM are scarce, their significance is of great importance due to the proposed changes in the therapeutic approach.
The main research aims concerning the use of CGMS during pregnancy include comparison of CGMS to intermittent blood glucose monitoring (finger prick self-monitoring)[41-44], determination of the ideal time to measure post-prandial glucose concentrations[44-50] and day to day variability of the glycemic profile[41,51-54]. Additionally, some studies have evaluated the reliability, specificity and accuracy of the CGMS’s readings. In particular, the ability of CGMS to detect asymptomatic episodes of hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia has been studied in pregnant women with DM type 1[41,42].
In 2008, two pilot studies concerning intrapartum application of CGMS were published. In a prospective study by Stenninger et al[55], a CGMS was used to monitor the glucose profile of fifteen pregnant women with insulin-treated DM in the last 120 min before delivery. The capillary plasma glucose concentrations were checked hourly and rapid-acting insulin analogues were injected subcutaneously if these levels exceeded 7 mmol/L, in an attempt to reduce the frequency of early neonatal hypoglycemia. In their conclusions, researchers state that parturients with insulin-treated DM coped well with CGMS. They also emphasized the correlation between strict normoglycemia and occurrence of postnatal hypoglycemia. Their suggestion was that CGMS is a feasible and valuable method for close glucose monitoring intrapartum. The interpretation emerges from the superiority of CGMS over intermittent blood glucose monitoring when maximal information about glucose fluctuations is vital.
In the second study, Iafusco et al[56] used a real time CGMS to monitor the glucose profile of eighteen pregnant women with DM type 1 in two phases: antenatal, during treatment with bethamethasone for fetal lung maturation and intrapartum. The main target in both phases was to achieve normoglycemia by using intravenous administration of insulin and glucose fluctuation monitoring. In their conclusions, the researchers state that no infant experienced hypoglycemia or respiratory distress syndrome at the moment and within the first hours after birth. They also emphasized the importance of strict glycemic control in these two phases in pregnant women with DM type 1, considering the CGMS as an important tool to achieve it.
More recently, our group conducted a feasibility study[57] with the primary aim to assess the feasibility of the CGMS in the deliveries of pregnancies complicated with DM; a secondary aim was to examine CGMS acceptance by the women. The study involved twelve pregnant women with GDM. The minimally invasive microdialysis-based CGMS (Gluco-Day, Menarini Diagnostics) was used to record glucose profile during labor. The device was installed 6 h before delivery for a total of 48 h. As far as the primary aim is concerned, no pain was reported during sensor installation and removal. Subcutaneous application into the abdominal wall did not affect the obstetric interventions. In the case of vaginal delivery, even an operative one, CGMS did not affect the continuous electronic fetal monitoring, the application of epidural analgesia, or the use of ultrasonography, when needed. In the case of caesarean section, the selection of the site for the placement of the sensor (far enough from the incision) and its careful immobilization guaranteed the successful recording. In two cases, the monitoring failed (breaking of the microdialysis fiber, device disconnection). As far as the secondary aim is concerned, the mode of delivery was associated with the acceptance of the device postpartum: all women that gave birth vaginally (n = 6) reported discomfort in contrast to the women that underwent caesarean section (n = 6). This can be attributed to different levels of postpartum mobility between the two groups. All women coped well with the CGMS and reported feeling secure by checking glucose concentrations in real-time.
In pregnancies complicated with DM, both perinatal and intrapartum normoglycemia is an important milestone in the ultimate goal of reducing perinatal morbidity and mortality. Once diagnosed with DM, pregnancies receive special obstetric management by intense monitoring and adjustment of therapeutic interventions. Even then, the absolute absence of any complication is not guaranteed. Intrapartum glucose monitoring protocols were developed in the name of strict glucose control, although there is still much to be elucidated in the pathophysiology of DM and its behavior intrapartum. CGMS is a tempting and promising technology, with its reliability, specificity and accuracy being evaluated and tested in recent clinical trials. The intrapartum application of CGMS in pregnancies complicated with DM allows for a closer observation of glucose concentrations and is expected to lead to a more etiological management of both the mother and her foetus/infant. As a future perspective, a large, prospective study is needed to determine the clinical implications of intrapartum application of CGMS.
P- Reviewer Power RW S- Editor Zhai HH L- Editor Roemmele A E- Editor Zheng XM
1. | Burke JP, Williams K, Gaskill SP, Hazuda HP, Haffner SM, Stern MP. Rapid rise in the incidence of type 2 diabetes from 1987 to 1996: results from the San Antonio Heart Study. Arch Intern Med. 1999;159:1450-1456. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 200] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 218] [Article Influence: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
2. | Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, Sicree R, King H. Global prevalence of diabetes: estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030. Diabetes Care. 2004;27:1047-1053. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 9344] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 8860] [Article Influence: 443.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
3. | Hunt KJ, Schuller KL. The increasing prevalence of diabetes in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2007;34:173-199, vii. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 339] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 339] [Article Influence: 19.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
4. | Klonoff DC. Continuous glucose monitoring technology delivers detailed diabetes data. Point Care. 2006;5:105-111. [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 3] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 3] [Article Influence: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
5. | Adashi EY, Pinto H, Tyson JE. Impact of maternal euglycemia on fetal outcome in diabetic pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1979;133:268-274. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
6. | Skyler JS, O’Sullivan MJ, Robertson EG, Skyler DL, Holsinger KK, Lasky IA, McLeod AG, Burkett G, Mintz DH. Blood glucose control during pregnancy. Diabetes Care. 1980;3:69-76. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 33] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 33] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
7. | Yang X, Hsu-Hage B, Zhang H, Zhang C, Zhang Y, Zhang C. Women with impaired glucose tolerance during pregnancy have significantly poor pregnancy outcomes. Diabetes Care. 2002;25:1619-1624. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 122] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 123] [Article Influence: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
8. | Walkinshaw SA. Pregnancy in women with pre-existing diabetes: management issues. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2005;10:307-315. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 31] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 32] [Article Influence: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
9. | Obenshain SS, Adam PA, King KC, Teramo K, Raivio KO, Räihä N, Schwartz R. Human fetal insulin response to sustained maternal hyperglycemia. N Engl J Med. 1970;283:566-570. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 84] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 89] [Article Influence: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
10. | Andersen O, Hertel J, Schmølker L, Kühl C. Influence of the maternal plasma glucose concentration at delivery on the risk of hypoglycaemia in infants of insulin-dependent diabetic mothers. Acta Paediatr Scand. 1985;74:268-273. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 41] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 41] [Article Influence: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
11. | Carron Brown S, Kyne-Grzebalski D, Mwangi B, Taylor R. Effect of management policy upon 120 Type 1 diabetic pregnancies: policy decisions in practice. Diabet Med. 1999;16:573-578. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 46] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 49] [Article Influence: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
12. | Jovanovic L. Glucose and insulin requirements during labor and delivery: the case for normoglycemia in pregnancies complicated by diabetes. Endocr Pract. 2004;10 Suppl 2:40-45. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
13. | Balsells M, Corcoy R, Adelantado JM, García-Patterson A, Altirriba O, de Leiva A. Gestational diabetes mellitus: metabolic control during labour. Diabetes Nutr Metab. 2000;13:257-262. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
14. | Stenninger E, Flink R, Eriksson B, Sahlèn C. Long-term neurological dysfunction and neonatal hypoglycaemia after diabetic pregnancy. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 1998;79:F174-F179. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 111] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 114] [Article Influence: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
15. | Kline GA, Edwards A. Antepartum and intra-partum insulin management of type 1 and type 2 diabetic women: Impact on clinically significant neonatal hypoglycemia. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2007;77:223-230. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 50] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 51] [Article Influence: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
16. | Taylor R, Lee C, Kyne-Grzebalski D, Marshall SM, Davison JM. Clinical outcomes of pregnancy in women with type 1 diabetes(1). Obstet Gynecol. 2002;99:537-541. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 42] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 49] [Article Influence: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
17. | Guideline Development Group. Management of diabetes from preconception to the postnatal period: summary of NICE guidance. BMJ. 2008;336:714-717. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 108] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 117] [Article Influence: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
18. | West TE, Lowy C. Control of blood glucose during labour in diabetic women with combined glucose and low-dose insulin infusion. Br Med J. 1977;1:1252-1254. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 47] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 53] [Article Influence: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
19. | Nattrass M, Alberti KG, Dennis KJ, Gillibrand PN, Letchworth AT, Buckle AL. A glucose-controlled insulin infusion system for diabetic women during labour. Br Med J. 1978;2:599-601. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 23] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 24] [Article Influence: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
20. | Haigh SE, Tevaarwerk GJ, Harding PE, Hurst C. A method for maintaining normoglycemia during labour and delivery in insulin-dependent diabetic women. Can Med Assoc J. 1982;126:487-490. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
21. | Lean ME, Pearson DW, Sutherland HW. Insulin management during labour and delivery in mothers with diabetes. Diabet Med. 1990;7:162-164. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 41] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 42] [Article Influence: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
22. | Lepercq J, Abbou H, Agostini C, Toubas F, Francoual C, Velho G, Dubois-Laforgue D, Timsit J. A standardized protocol to achieve normoglycaemia during labour and delivery in women with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Metab. 2008;34:33-37. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 21] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 22] [Article Influence: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
23. | Caplan RH, Pagliara AS, Beguin EA, Smiley CA, Bina-Frymark M, Goettl KA, Hartigan JM, Tankersley JC, Peck TM. Constant intravenous insulin infusion during labor and delivery in diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care. 1982;5:6-10. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 42] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 44] [Article Influence: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
24. | Hawkins JS, Casey BM. Labor and delivery management for women with diabetes. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2007;34:323-334, x. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 20] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 21] [Article Influence: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
25. | ACE/ADA Task Force on Inpatient Diabetes. American College of Endocrinology and American Diabetes Association consensus statement on inpatient diabetes and glycemic control. Endocr Pract. 2006;12:458-468. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
26. | Bowen DJ, Daykin AP, Nancekievill ML, Norman J. Insulin-dependent diabetic patients during surgery and labour. Use of continuous intravenous insulin-glucose-potassium infusions. Anaesthesia. 1984;39:407-411. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 17] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 17] [Article Influence: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
27. | Yeast JD, Porreco RP, Ginsberg HN. The use of continuous insulin infusion for the peripartum management of pregnant diabetic women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1978;131:861-864. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
28. | Hadden DR. How to improve prognosis in type 1 diabetic pregnancy. Old problems, new concepts. Diabetes Care. 1999;22 Suppl 2:B104-B108. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
29. | Jovanovic L, Peterson CM. Insulin and glucose requirements during the first stage of labor in insulin-dependent diabetic women. Am J Med. 1983;75:607-612. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 52] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 53] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
30. | Clarke WL, Cox D, Gonder-Frederick LA, Carter W, Pohl SL. Evaluating clinical accuracy of systems for self-monitoring of blood glucose. Diabetes Care. 1987;10:622-628. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
31. | Klonoff DC. Continuous glucose monitoring: roadmap for 21st century diabetes therapy. Diabetes Care. 2005;28:1231-1239. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 489] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 398] [Article Influence: 20.9] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
32. | Abrahamian H, Francesconi M, Loiskandl A, Dzien A, Prager R, Weitgasser R. Evaluation of a new insulinotropic agent by using an innovative technology: efficacy and safety of nateglinide determined by continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2004;6:31-37. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 11] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 11] [Article Influence: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
33. | Jefferies C, Solomon M, Perlman K, Sweezey N, Daneman D. Continuous glucose monitoring in adolescents with cystic fibrosis. J Pediatr. 2005;147:396-398. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 38] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 34] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
34. | Brennan AL, Gyi KM, Wood DM, Hodson ME, Geddes DM, Baker EH. Relationship between glycosylated haemoglobin and mean plasma glucose concentration in cystic fibrosis. J Cyst Fibros. 2006;5:27-31. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 24] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 24] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
35. | Goldberg PA, Siegel MD, Russell RR, Sherwin RS, Halickman JI, Cooper DA, Dziura JD, Inzucchi SE. Experience with the continuous glucose monitoring system in a medical intensive care unit. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2004;6:339-347. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 117] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 121] [Article Influence: 6.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
36. | Beardsall K, Ogilvy-Stuart AL, Ahluwalia J, Thompson M, Dunger DB. The continuous glucose monitoring sensor in neonatal intensive care. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2005;90:F307-F310. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 86] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 91] [Article Influence: 4.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
37. | Chee F, Fernando TL, Savkin AV, van Heeden V. Expert PID control system for blood glucose control in critically ill patients. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed. 2003;7:419-425. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 113] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 55] [Article Influence: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
38. | Javid PJ, Halwick DR, Betit P, Thompson JE, Long K, Zhang Y, Jaksic T, Agus MS. The first use of live continuous glucose monitoring in patients on extracorporeal life support. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2005;7:431-439. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 13] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 15] [Article Influence: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
39. | Hershkovitz E, Rachmel A, Ben-Zaken H, Phillip M. Continuous glucose monitoring in children with glycogen storage disease type I. J Inherit Metab Dis. 2001;24:863-869. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 33] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 33] [Article Influence: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
40. | Klonoff DC, Buckingham B, Christiansen JS, Montori VM, Tamborlane WV, Vigersky RA, Wolpert H. Continuous glucose monitoring: an Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011;96:2968-2979. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 158] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 160] [Article Influence: 12.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
41. | Yogev Y, Ben-Haroush A, Chen R, Kaplan B, Phillip M, Hod M. Continuous glucose monitoring for treatment adjustment in diabetic pregnancies--a pilot study. Diabet Med. 2003;20:558-562. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 49] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 51] [Article Influence: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
42. | Yogev Y, Chen R, Ben-Haroush A, Phillip M, Jovanovic L, Hod M. Continuous glucose monitoring for the evaluation of gravid women with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Obstet Gynecol. 2003;101:633-638. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 27] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 38] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
43. | Chen R, Yogev Y, Ben-Haroush A, Jovanovic L, Hod M, Phillip M. Continuous glucose monitoring for the evaluation and improved control of gestational diabetes mellitus. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2003;14:256-260. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 72] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 61] [Article Influence: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
44. | Kestilä KK, Ekblad UU, Rönnemaa T. Continuous glucose monitoring versus self-monitoring of blood glucose in the treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2007;77:174-179. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 70] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 74] [Article Influence: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
45. | Huddleston JF, Cramer MK, Vroon DH. A rationale for omitting two-hour postprandial glucose determinations in gestational diabetes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1993;169:257-262; discussion 262-264. [PubMed] [Cited in This Article: ] |
46. | Moses RG, Lucas EM, Knights S. Gestational diabetes mellitus. At what time should the postprandial glucose level be monitored. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1999;39:457-460. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 33] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 33] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
47. | Leguizamón G, Krupitzki H, Glujovsky D, Olivera Ravasi M, Reece EA. Blood glucose monitoring in gestational diabetes mellitus: 1- versus 2-h blood glucose determinations. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2002;12:384-388. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 12] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 13] [Article Influence: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
48. | Sivan E, Weisz B, Homko CJ, Reece EA, Schiff E. One or two hours postprandial glucose measurements: are they the same. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2001;185:604-607. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 30] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 30] [Article Influence: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
49. | Ben-Haroush A, Yogev Y, Chen R, Rosenn B, Hod M, Langer O. The postprandial glucose profile in the diabetic pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:576-581. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 70] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 61] [Article Influence: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
50. | Bühling KJ, Winkel T, Wolf C, Kurzidim B, Mahmoudi M, Wohlfarth K, Wäscher C, Schink T, Dudenhausen JW. Optimal timing for postprandial glucose measurement in pregnant women with diabetes and a non-diabetic pregnant population evaluated by the Continuous Glucose Monitoring System (CGMS). J Perinat Med. 2005;33:125-131. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 43] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 42] [Article Influence: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
51. | Kerssen A, de Valk HW, Visser GH. Day-to-day glucose variability during pregnancy in women with Type 1 diabetes mellitus: glucose profiles measured with the Continuous Glucose Monitoring System. BJOG. 2004;111:919-924. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 49] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 50] [Article Influence: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
52. | Kerssen A, Evers IM, de Valk HW, Visser GH. Poor glucose control in women with type 1 diabetes mellitus and ‘safe’ hemoglobin A1c values in the first trimester of pregnancy. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2003;13:309-313. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 33] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 35] [Article Influence: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
53. | Kerssen A, de Valk HW, Visser GH. Forty-eight-hour first-trimester glucose profiles in women with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a report of three cases of congenital malformation. Prenat Diagn. 2006;26:123-127. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 24] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 24] [Article Influence: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis (0)] |
54. | Yogev Y, Ben-Haroush A, Chen R, Rosenn B, Hod M, Langer O. Diurnal glycemic profile in obese and normal weight nondiabetic pregnant women. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;191:949-953. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 119] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 103] [Article Influence: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis (1)] |
55. | Stenninger E, Lindqvist A, Aman J, Ostlund I, Schvarcz E. Continuous Subcutaneous Glucose Monitoring System in diabetic mothers during labour and postnatal glucose adaptation of their infants. Diabet Med. 2008;25:450-454. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 33] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 33] [Article Influence: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis (2)] |
56. | Iafusco D, Stoppoloni F, Salvia G, Vernetti G, Passaro P, Petrovski G, Prisco F. Use of real time continuous glucose monitoring and intravenous insulin in type 1 diabetic mothers to prevent respiratory distress and hypoglycaemia in infants. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2008;8:23. [PubMed] [DOI] [Cited in This Article: ] [Cited by in Crossref: 26] [Cited by in F6Publishing: 28] [Article Influence: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis (4)] |
57. | Harizopoulou VC, Goulis DG, Vavilis DS, Grimbizis G, Tsakalis AV, Saranti ES, Tarlatzis BC. The intrapartum application of Continuous Glucose Monitoring System in pregnancies complicated with diabetes. Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on Diabetes and Pregnancy. Austria: Salzburg 2011; 23-26. [Cited in This Article: ] |