Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia: Initial Experience at a Tertiary Care Center

ObjectivePatients hospitalized with COVID-19 and hyperglycemia require frequent glucose monitoring, usually performed with glucometers. Continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) are common in the outpatient setting but not yet approved for hospital use. We evaluated CGM accuracy, safety for insulin dosing, and CGM clinical reliability in 20 adult patients hospitalized with COVID-19 and hyperglycemia.MethodsStudy patients were fitted with a remotely monitored CGM. CGM values were evaluated against glucometer readings. The CGM sensor calibration was performed if necessary. CGM values were used to dose insulin, without glucometer confirmation.ResultsCGM accuracy against glucometer, expressed as mean absolute relative difference (MARD), was calculated using 812 paired glucometer-CGM values. The aggregate MARD was 10.4%. For time in range and grades 1 and 2 hyperglycemia, MARD was 11.4%, 9.4%, and 9.1%, respectively, with a small variation between medical floors and intensive care units. There was no MARD correlation with mean arterial blood pressure levels, oxygen saturation, daily hemoglobin levels, and glomerular filtration rates. CGM clinical reliability was high, with 99.7% of the CGM values falling within the “safe” zones of Clarke error grid. After CGM placement, the frequency of glucometer measurements decreased from 5 to 3 and then 2 per day, reducing nurse presence in patient rooms and limiting viral exposure.ConclusionWith twice daily, on-demand calibration, the inpatient CGM use was safe for insulin dosing, decreasing the frequency of glucometer fingersticks. For glucose levels >70 mg/dL, CGMs showed adequate accuracy, without interference from vital and laboratory values.     

2021 PACES expert consensus statement on the indications and management of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices in pediatric patients

In view of the increasing complexity of both cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) and patients in the current era, practice guidelines, by necessity, have become increasingly specific. This document is an expert consensus statement that has been developed to update and further delineate indications and management of CIEDs in pediatric patients, defined as ≤21 years of age, and is intended to focus primarily on the indications for CIEDs in the setting of specific disease categories. The document also highlights variations between previously published adult and pediatric CIED recommendations and provides rationale for underlying important differences. The document addresses some of the deterrents to CIED access in low- and middle-income countries and strategies to circumvent them. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by class of recommendation and level of evidence. Several questions addressed in this document either do not lend themselves to clinical trials or are rare disease entities, and in these instances recommendations are based on consensus expert opinion. Furthermore, specific recommendations, even when supported by substantial data, do not replace the need for clinical judgment and patient-specific decision-making. The recommendations were opened for public comment to Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) members and underwent external review by the scientific and clinical document committee of the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), the science advisory and coordinating committee of the American Heart Association (AHA), the American College of Cardiology (ACC), and the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). The document received endorsement by all the collaborators and the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), the Indian Heart Rhythm Society (IHRS), and the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS). This document is expected to provide support for clinicians and patients to allow for appropriate CIED use, appropriate CIED management, and appropriate CIED follow-up in pediatric patients.     

Un-LINQed: Spontaneous extrusion of newer generation implantable loop recorders

BackgroundInsertable cardiac monitors (ICMs) are often used for long-term monitoring of cardiac rhythm. The Medtronic’s LINQ Reveal ™ is a new generation wireless, automated, and patient responsive subcutaneous ECG monitoring device. Despite several advantages to its small size we have noted an unusually high incidence of extrusion at our center.Methods& Results: We conducted a retrospective case analysis to review Reveal LINQs implanted at our center. All devices were inserted using the provided insertion tools. Patients with extruded devices were identified and details regarding the site and technique of insertion, incision closure, use of peri-operative antibiotics, and follow-up details were collected. 81 patients underwent 85 Reveal LINQ implants at a tertiary care University Hospital referral center. The most common reason for implant was suspected arrhythmia with or without structural heart disease or unexplained syncope. There were 4 spontaneous extrusions occurring within 7–24 days after insertion with an incidence rate of 4.7%. One extruded device was anchored to subcutaneous tissue, and no pocket/device infections or hematomas were noted.ConclusionsDevice migration and erosion through skin are important potential adverse events for the Reveal LINQ implantable loop recorder. This study reports an unexpectedly high rate of extrusion without infection. The authors suggest that the depth of the incision is the main factor impacting extrusions. Larger studies are recommended, however, and a proposed measure to avoid spontaneous extrusion is the design of a longer manufacturer’s blade in order to increase the depth of the incision and insertion.