FULL TEXT AT LINK http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/full/10.1089/dia.2014.0238 [h=1]Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics[/h] About This Journal... [h=2]A Clinical Trial of the Accuracy and Treatment Experience of the Dexcom G4 Sensor (Dexcom G4 System) and Enlite Sensor (Guardian REAL-Time System) Tested Simultaneously in Ambulatory Patients with Type 1 Diabetes[/h]To cite this article: Matuleviciene Viktorija, Joseph Jeffrey I., Andelin Mervi, Hirsch Irl B., Attvall Stig, Pivodic Aldina, Dahlqvist Sofia, Klonoff David, Haraldsson Börje, and Lind Marcus. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics. -Not available-, ahead of print. doi:10.1089/dia.2014.0238. Online Ahead of Print: September 18, 2014 Full Text HTML Full Text PDF (268.2 KB) Full Text PDF with Links (174.6 KB) Navigate ArticleTop of pageAuthor information <<ABSTRACTIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionAcknowledgmentsAuthor Disclosure Stateme...References[h=3]Author information[/h] Viktorija Matuleviciene, MD,[SUP]1[/SUP] Jeffrey I. Joseph, DO,[SUP]2[/SUP] Mervi Andelin, RN, BSc,[SUP]3[/SUP] Irl B. Hirsch, MD,[SUP]4[/SUP] Stig Attvall, MD, PhD,[SUP]1[/SUP] Aldina Pivodic, MSc,[SUP]5[/SUP] Sofia Dahlqvist,[SUP]3[/SUP] David Klonoff, MD,[SUP]6[/SUP] Börje Haraldsson, MD,[SUP]1[/SUP]and Marcus Lind, MD, PhD[SUP]1,[/SUP][SUP]3[/SUP] [SUP]1[/SUP]Institute of Medicine, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. [SUP]2[/SUP]Department of Anesthesiology, Jefferson Medical College of Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. [SUP]3[/SUP]Department of Medicine, NU-Hospital Organization, Uddevalla, Sweden. [SUP]4[/SUP]University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. [SUP]5[/SUP]Statistiska Konsultgruppen, Gothenburg, Sweden. [SUP]6[/SUP]Diabetes Research Institute, Mills-Peninsula Health Services, San Mateo, California. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov with clinical trial registration number NCT02159638. Address correspondence to: Marcus Lind, MD, PhD Uddevalla Hospital451 80 Uddevalla, Sweden E-mail: email@example.com Navigate ArticleTop of pageAuthor informationABSTRACT <<IntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionAcknowledgmentsAuthor Disclosure Stateme...References[h=3]ABSTRACT[/h] Background: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is a tool widely used in the treatment of patients with type 1 diabetes. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate whether accuracy and patient treatment satisfaction differ between the Enlite™ (Medtronic MiniMed, Inc., Northridge, CA) and Dexcom[SUP]®[/SUP] (San Diego, CA) G4 PLATINUM CGM sensors. Subjects and Methods: Thirty-eight ambulatory patients with type 1 diabetes used the Dexcom G4 and Enlite sensors simultaneously for a minimum of 4 and maximum of 6 days. Patients measured capillary glucose levels with a HemoCue[SUP]®[/SUP] (Ängelholm, Sweden) system six to 10 times a day. In addition, two inpatient studies were performed between Days 1–3 and 4–6. Results: The mean absolute relative difference (MARD) in blood glucose for the Dexcom G4 was significantly lower (13.9%) than for the Enlite sensor (17.8%) (P<0.0001). The corresponding MARDs for Days 1–3 were 15.0% versus 19.4% (P=0.0027) and 13.6% versus 15.9% (P=0.026) for Days 4–6. For glucose levels in the hypoglycemic range (<4.0 mmol/L), the MARD for the Dexcom G4 was 20.0% compared with 34.7% for the Enlite (P=0.0041). On a visual analog scale (VAS) (0–100), patients rated the Dexcom G4 more favorably than the Enlite in 12 out of the 13 user experience questions. For example, more patients rated their experience with the Dexcom G4 as positive (VAS, 79.7 vs. 46.6; P<0.0001) and preferred to use it in their daily lives (VAS, 79.1 vs. 42.1;P<0.0001). Conclusions: The Dexcom G4 sensor was associated with greater overall accuracy than the Enlite sensor during initial (Days 1–3) and later (Days 4–6) use and for glucose levels in the hypoglycemic range. Patients reported a significantly more positive experience using the Dexcom G4 than the Enlite.