Real-World Safety of an Implantable Continuous Glucose Sensor Over Multiple Cycles of Use: A Post-Market Registry Study
Open accessAbstract
Previously, the safety and accuracy of the Eversense continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system were characterized in three pivotal trials among individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) with a single 90- or 180-day sensor insertion–removal cycle. The Post-Market Clinical Follow-up (PMCF) registry is a prospective study evaluating the long-term safety and performance of the Eversense CGM system over multiple sensor insertion–removal cycles among adults with T1D and T2D. All patients who had a sensor subcutaneously implanted across 534 participating centers in Europe and South Africa from June 2016 to August 2018 were enrolled. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded at each visit and patients were instructed to inform their clinic if they experienced any AEs between visits. AEs were adjudicated for relatedness to the device, procedure, or drug (dexamethasone acetate). The primary safety endpoint was the rate of related serious adverse events (SAEs) through four sensor insertion–removal cycles. The registry enrolled 3023 patients. As of last follow-up, 5417 sensors had been inserted with a total of 1260 patient-years (PYs) of follow-up: 969 patients had used the system for at least 6 months and 173 patients had used the system for at least 1 year. No related SAEs were reported. The most frequently reported related AEs were sensor location site infection (0.96%; 2.46 events per 100 PYs), inability to remove the sensor upon first attempt (0.76%; 1.90 events per 100 PYs), and adhesive patch location site irritation (0.66%; 1.59 events per 100 PYs). One nonserious allergic reaction to lidocaine was reported, which resolved with administration of an antihistamine. The full intended sensor life was achieved by 91% of 90-day sensors and 75% of 180-day sensors. The PMCF registry provides real-world evidence that the Eversense CGM system is safe over multiple cycles of use.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The use of an implanted sensor can help avoid skin reactions in those who are sensitive to tape.
“In some instances, the use of an implanted sensor can help avoid skin reactions in those who are sensitive to tape (84,85).”
From The management of type 1 diabetes in adults. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) (2021) · cites this paper as [84]
The Discussion (page unavailable) says skin reactions with the implanted Eversense system were less clinically significant than allergic contact dermatitis reported with some transcutaneous systems. But the Results report adhesive-patch irritation in 20 patients, and the paper does not establish that the system helps people sensitive to tape avoid skin reactions. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Beck, R. W., Riddlesworth, T., Ruedy, K., Ahmann, A., Bergenstal, R., Haller, S., Kollman, C., Kruger, D., McGill, J. B., Polonsky, W., et al. (2017) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2016.19975 · Cited by 1,185 · see citing works
Beck, R. W., Riddlesworth, T. D., Ruedy, K., Ahmann, A., Haller, S., Kruger, D., McGill, J. B., Polonsky, W., Price, D., Aronoff, S., et al. (2017) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m16-2855 · Cited by 635 · see citing works
Herman, A., Aerts, O., Baeck, M., Bruze, M., De Block, C., Goossens, A., Hamnerius, N., Huygens, S., Maiter, D., Tennstedt, D., et al. (2017) · Contact Dermatitis · doi:10.1111/cod.12866 · Cited by 192 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- [1]Lind M, Polonsky W, Hirsch IB, et al.: Continuous glucose monitoring vs conventional therapy for glycemic control in adults with type 1 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections: the GOLD randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2017; 317: 379– 387 28118454
- [4]Hommel E, Olsen B, Battelino T, et al.: Impact of continuous glucose monitoring on quality of life, treatment satisfaction, and use of medical care resources: analyses from the SWITCH study. Acta Diabetol 2014; 51: 845– 851 25037251 PMC4176956
- [5]Engler R, Routh TL, Lucisano JY: Adoption barriers for continuous glucose monitoring and their potential reduction with a fully implanted system: results from patient preference surveys. Clin Diabetes 2018; 36: 50– 58 29382979 PMC5774999
- [6]Wong JC, Foster NC, Maahs DM, et al.: Real-time continuous glucose monitoring among participants in the T1D exchange clinic registry. Diabetes Care 2014; 37: 2702– 2709 25011947 PMC4392936
- [7]Foster NC, Beck RW, Miller KM, et al.: State of type 1 diabetes management and outcomes from the T1D exchange in 2016–2018. Diabetes Technol Ther 2019; 21: 66– 72 30657336 PMC7061293
- [8]Christiansen MP, Klaff LJ, Brazg R, et al.: A prospective multicenter evaluation of the accuracy of a novel implanted continuous glucose sensor: PRECISE II. Diabetes Technol Ther 2018; 20: 197– 206 29381090 PMC5867508
- [9]Kropff J, Choudhary P, Neupane S, et al.: Accuracy and longevity of an implantable continuous glucose sensor in the PRECISE study: a 180-day, prospective, multicenter, pivotal trial. Diabetes Care 2017; 40: 63– 68 27815290
- [10]Christiansen M, Klaff LJ, Bailey TS, et al.: A prospective multicenter evaluation of the accuracy and safety of an implanted continuous glucose sensor: the PRECISION study. Diabetes Technol Ther 2019; 21: 231– 237 30925083 PMC6532543
- [12]Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group. Implementation of treatment protocols in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial. Diabetes Care 1995; 18: 361– 376 7555480
- [13]Herman A, Aerts O, Baeck M, et al.: Allergic contact dermatitis caused by isobornyl acrylate in Freestyle® Libre, a newly introduced glucose sensor. Contact Dermatitis 2017; 77: 367– 373 28804907
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Holt, R. I. G., DeVries, J. H., Hess-Fischl, A., Hirsch, I. B., Kirkman, M. S., Klupa, T., Ludwig, B., Nørgaard, K., Pettus, J., Renard, E., et al. (2021) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dci21-0043 · Cited by 699 · see citing works
7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2025
American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee, ElSayed, N. A., McCoy, R. G., Aleppo, G., Balapattabi, K., Beverly, E. A., Briggs Early, K., Bruemmer, D., Echouffo-Tcheugui, J. B., Ekhlaspour, L., et al. (2025) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc25-s007 · Cited by 348 · see citing works
7. Diabetes Technology: <i>Standards of Care in Diabetes</i> — <i>2023</i>
ElSayed, N. A., Aleppo, G., Aroda, V. R., Bannuru, R. R., Brown, F. M., Bruemmer, D., Collins, B. S., Hilliard, M. E., Isaacs, D., Johnson, E. L., et al. (2023) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc23-s007 · Cited by 301 · see citing works
7. Diabetes Technology: <i>Standards of Care in Diabetes—2024</i>
American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee, ElSayed, N. A., Aleppo, G., Bannuru, R. R., Bruemmer, D., Collins, B. S., Ekhlaspour, L., Hilliard, M. E., Johnson, E. L., Khunti, K., et al. (2024) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc24-s007 · Cited by 281 · see citing works
7. Diabetes Technology: <i>Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2022</i>
American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee (2022) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc22-s007 · Cited by 358 · see citing works
7. Diabetes Technology: <i>Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2021</i>
American Diabetes Association (2021) · Diabetes Care · doi:10.2337/dc21-s007 · Cited by 202 · see citing works
- Authors
- Deiss, D., Irace, C., Carlson, G., Tweden, K. S., & Kaufman, F. R.
- Affiliations
- Medicover (DE)
- Magna Graecia University (IT)
- Carlson Consulting, San Francisco, California.
- Senseonics (United States) (US)
- Corresponding author
- Tweden, Katherine S.
- Venue
- Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2020-01
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 48-52
- ISSN
- 1520-9156 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-8593
- PMC
- PMC6945795
- OpenAlex
- W2967819471
- Cited by
- 44
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 5.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Electrochemical sensors and biosensors
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
- Keywords
- sensor safety, type 1 diabetes, type 2 diabetes, serious adverse events, real-world evidence
- MeSH terms
- Wearable Electronic Devices, Blood Glucose, Humans, Product Surveillance, Postmarketing, Prospective Studies, Registries, Monitoring, Ambulatory
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review