Limits...
Glucose sensing in the peritoneal space offers faster kinetics than sensing in the subcutaneous space.

Burnett DR, Huyett LM, Zisser HC, Doyle FJ, Mensh BD - Diabetes (2014)

Bottom Line: We compared the temporal response characteristics of simultaneously placed subcutaneous and intraperitoneal sensors during intravenous glucose tolerance tests in eight swine.Using compartmental modeling based on simultaneous intravenous sensing, blood draws, and intraarterial sensing, we found that intraperitoneal kinetics were more than twice as fast as subcutaneous kinetics (mean time constant of 5.6 min for intraperitoneal vs. 12.4 min for subcutaneous).Combined with the known faster kinetics of intraperitoneal insulin delivery over subcutaneous delivery, our findings suggest that artificial pancreas technologies may be optimized by sensing glucose and delivering insulin in the intraperitoneal space.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Theranova, LLC, San Francisco, CA.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

A: Sample raw data from an intravenous (IV) glucose challenge in one pig. Unfiltered data were collected every second (1 Hz). B: Calculation of latency (time to half-maximum) and recovery (percent return to baseline at 35 min) for a sample intraperitoneal (IP) trace. Data are filtered using a 1-min sliding window average. Baseline is determined by the average reading for the 3 min before the onset of the glucose challenge. As with the baseline, the value at 35 min is also determined by a 3-min average (33.5 to 36.5 min). IA, intraarterial; SQ, subcutaneous.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4066336&req=5

Figure 1: A: Sample raw data from an intravenous (IV) glucose challenge in one pig. Unfiltered data were collected every second (1 Hz). B: Calculation of latency (time to half-maximum) and recovery (percent return to baseline at 35 min) for a sample intraperitoneal (IP) trace. Data are filtered using a 1-min sliding window average. Baseline is determined by the average reading for the 3 min before the onset of the glucose challenge. As with the baseline, the value at 35 min is also determined by a 3-min average (33.5 to 36.5 min). IA, intraarterial; SQ, subcutaneous.

Mentions: Figure 1A shows raw sensor current data from a hyperglycemia challenge. Of note are the rapid rise and fall of the intravascular (intraarterial and intravenous) sensors, and the less rapid waveforms from the extravascular (intraperitoneal and subcutaneous) sensors. Figure 1B illustrates the response-time analysis described above, in which latency (a measure of how rapidly the tissue glucose increases after a vascular bolus) and recovery (a measure of how rapidly the tissue glucose decreases as the vascular glucose decreases over 35 min postbolus) were read from each sensor curve.


Glucose sensing in the peritoneal space offers faster kinetics than sensing in the subcutaneous space.

Burnett DR, Huyett LM, Zisser HC, Doyle FJ, Mensh BD - Diabetes (2014)

A: Sample raw data from an intravenous (IV) glucose challenge in one pig. Unfiltered data were collected every second (1 Hz). B: Calculation of latency (time to half-maximum) and recovery (percent return to baseline at 35 min) for a sample intraperitoneal (IP) trace. Data are filtered using a 1-min sliding window average. Baseline is determined by the average reading for the 3 min before the onset of the glucose challenge. As with the baseline, the value at 35 min is also determined by a 3-min average (33.5 to 36.5 min). IA, intraarterial; SQ, subcutaneous.
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4066336&req=5

Figure 1: A: Sample raw data from an intravenous (IV) glucose challenge in one pig. Unfiltered data were collected every second (1 Hz). B: Calculation of latency (time to half-maximum) and recovery (percent return to baseline at 35 min) for a sample intraperitoneal (IP) trace. Data are filtered using a 1-min sliding window average. Baseline is determined by the average reading for the 3 min before the onset of the glucose challenge. As with the baseline, the value at 35 min is also determined by a 3-min average (33.5 to 36.5 min). IA, intraarterial; SQ, subcutaneous.
Mentions: Figure 1A shows raw sensor current data from a hyperglycemia challenge. Of note are the rapid rise and fall of the intravascular (intraarterial and intravenous) sensors, and the less rapid waveforms from the extravascular (intraperitoneal and subcutaneous) sensors. Figure 1B illustrates the response-time analysis described above, in which latency (a measure of how rapidly the tissue glucose increases after a vascular bolus) and recovery (a measure of how rapidly the tissue glucose decreases as the vascular glucose decreases over 35 min postbolus) were read from each sensor curve.

Bottom Line: We compared the temporal response characteristics of simultaneously placed subcutaneous and intraperitoneal sensors during intravenous glucose tolerance tests in eight swine.Using compartmental modeling based on simultaneous intravenous sensing, blood draws, and intraarterial sensing, we found that intraperitoneal kinetics were more than twice as fast as subcutaneous kinetics (mean time constant of 5.6 min for intraperitoneal vs. 12.4 min for subcutaneous).Combined with the known faster kinetics of intraperitoneal insulin delivery over subcutaneous delivery, our findings suggest that artificial pancreas technologies may be optimized by sensing glucose and delivering insulin in the intraperitoneal space.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Theranova, LLC, San Francisco, CA.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus