Wearing a Long-Term Implanted Continuous Glucose Monitoring (CGM) System vs. Conventional CGM in Adults with Type 1 Diabetes-The Physical Burden

Aim: To compare device tolerance & participant’s subjective experience wearing a surgically implanted long term glucose sensor versus conventional CGM in adults with Type 1 Diabetes. Method: A prototype CGM (Eclipse 3 sensor, GlySens, San Diego, CA) with masked glucose data transmitted to a study iPhone was surgically inserted superficial to the rectus sheath in 8 Adults with Type 1 Diabetes (4 Female; Mean [SD] Age 56 [7]Y; BMI 25[3]). One daily fingerstick glucose calibration was required. Participants simultaneously wore a conventional TGA approved multi-Day sensor that also transmitted unblinded glucose information to the Study iPhone. The two systems were compared using a standardized 5-point Leichardt scale questionnaire completed by participants at day 1, 7 and 14 post-implantation and monthly thereafter for the duration of study participation. Results: The investigation and comparator sensors were worn 100% and 98% percent of the time respectively over the study duration. Figure 1 summarizes the participant experience. Conclusions: Over time there was a general trend by all participants to favour the GlySens sensor and experience over the comparator CGM. . Figure 1: Participant experience over 10 months of sensor implantation. Disclosure L.Robinson: None. J.Tan: None. S.L.Martha: Employee; GlySens Incorporated. D.N.O'neal: None. V.R.Obeyesekere: None. H.Jones: None. Y.W.Kong: None. C.Yuan: None. K.Bertsch: Employee; GlySens. T.L.Routh: Employee; GlySens Incorporated. C.M.Sims: Stock/Shareholder; Medtronic. A.Butler: Employee; GlySens Incorporated.