Evaluation of a Novel Glucose Area Under the Curve (AUC) Monitoring System: Comparison with the AUC by Continuous Glucose Monitoring

BACKGROUND: Management of postprandial hyperglycemia is a key aspect in diabetes treatment. We developed a novel system to measure glucose area under the curve (AUC) using minimally invasive interstitial fluid extraction technology (MIET) for simple monitoring of postprandial glucose excursions. In this study, we evaluated the relationship between our system and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) by comparing glucose AUC obtained using MIET with that obtained using CGM for a long duration. METHODS: Twenty diabetic inpatients wearing a CGM system were enrolled. For MIET measurement, a plastic microneedle array was applied to the skin as pretreatment, and hydrogels were placed on the pretreated area to collect interstitial fluid. Hydrogels were replaced every 2 or 4 hours and AUC was predicted on the basis of glucose and sodium ion levels. RESULTS: AUC predicted by MIET correlated well with that measured by CGM (r=0.93). Good performances of both consecutive 2- and 4-hour measurements were observed (measurement error: 11.7%±10.2% for 2 hours and 11.1%±7.9% for 4 hours), indicating the possibility of repetitive measurements up to 8 hours. The influence of neither glucose fluctuation nor average glucose level over the measurement accuracy was observed through 8 hours. CONCLUSION: Our system showed good relationship with AUC values from CGM up to 8 hours, indicating that single pretreatment can cover a large portion of glucose excursion in a day. These results indicated possibility of our system to contribute to convenient monitoring of glucose excursions for a long duration.

Comparison of the hemodynamic effects of propofol and ketamine as anesthetic induction agents during high-dose remifentanil administration: a single-center retrospective comparative study

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that ketamine, when administered as the anesthetic induction agent, may prevent cardiovascular depression during high-dose remifentanil administration, unlike propofol. To test our hypothesis, we retrospectively compared the hemodynamic effects of ketamine, during high-dose remifentanil administration, with those of propofol. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients who underwent oral surgery at the Nagasaki University Hospital between April 2014 and June 2015 were included in this study. Anesthesia was induced by the following procedure: First, high-dose remifentanil (0.3-0.5 µg/kg/min) was administered 2-3 min before anesthesia induction; next, the anesthetic induction agent, either propofol (Group P) or ketamine (Group K), was administered. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and the heart rate were recorded by the automated anesthesia recording system at four time points: immediately before the administration of high-dose remifentanil (T1); immediately before the administration of propofol or ketamine (T2); 2.5 min (T3), and 5 min (T4) after the administration of the anesthetic induction agent. RESULTS: In Group P, the MAP at T3 (75.7 ± 15.5 mmHg, P = 0.0015) and T4 (68.3 ± 12.5 mmHg, P < 0.001) were significantly lower than those at T1 (94.0 ± 12.4 mmHg). However, the MAP values in the K group were very similar (P = 0.133) at all time points. The heart rates in both Groups P (P = 0.254) and K (P = 0.859) remained unchanged over time. CONCLUSIONS: We showed that ketamine, when administered as the anesthetic induction agent during high-dose remifentanil administration, prevents cardiovascular depression.

Comparison of the hemodynamic effects of propofol and ketamine as anesthetic induction agents during high-dose remifentanil administration: a single-center retrospective comparative study

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that ketamine, when administered as the anesthetic induction agent, may prevent cardiovascular depression during high-dose remifentanil administration, unlike propofol. To test our hypothesis, we retrospectively compared the hemodynamic effects of ketamine, during high-dose remifentanil administration, with those of propofol. METHODS: Thirty-eight patients who underwent oral surgery at the Nagasaki University Hospital between April 2014 and June 2015 were included in this study. Anesthesia was induced by the following procedure: First, high-dose remifentanil (0.3-0.5 µg/kg/min) was administered 2-3 min before anesthesia induction; next, the anesthetic induction agent, either propofol (Group P) or ketamine (Group K), was administered. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and the heart rate were recorded by the automated anesthesia recording system at four time points: immediately before the administration of high-dose remifentanil (T1); immediately before the administration of propofol or ketamine (T2); 2.5 min (T3), and 5 min (T4) after the administration of the anesthetic induction agent. RESULTS: In Group P, the MAP at T3 (75.7 ± 15.5 mmHg, P = 0.0015) and T4 (68.3 ± 12.5 mmHg, P < 0.001) were significantly lower than those at T1 (94.0 ± 12.4 mmHg). However, the MAP values in the K group were very similar (P = 0.133) at all time points. The heart rates in both Groups P (P = 0.254) and K (P = 0.859) remained unchanged over time. CONCLUSIONS: We showed that ketamine, when administered as the anesthetic induction agent during high-dose remifentanil administration, prevents cardiovascular depression.