LAUSR

Objective: The disparities were compared between flash glucose monitoring (FGM) sensor glucose (SG) values and SMBG blood glucose (BG) values vs. between continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) SG values and BG values to establish the accuracy of FGM SG values. Methods: CGM (CGMS-Gold, Medtronic Minimed) and FGM (FreeStyle Libre Pro; Abbott Japan) were simultaneously put in place in 16 type 2 diabetic patients admitted for glycemic control (BMI, 28.7 ± 5.2 kg/m 2 ; HbA1c, 9.8 ± 2.1%). SMBG BG values at 500 time points registered on CGMS-Gold for calibration purpose and CGM/FGM SG values at the same time points, were selected to examine the accuracy of FGM SG values. Both these devices were evaluated for accuracy in terms of 1) simple correlation coefficients between CGM/FGM SG values and BG values; and 2) mean absolute relative differences (MARD) in SG values of CGM/FGM relative to BG values as reference. Results: 1) A strong positive correlations were found between the SMBG BG values and CGM/FGM SG values ( r = 0.9462, p r = 0.8797, p Conclusions: Despite being an innovative device for glucose monitoring, FGM may be appropriately positioned as an adjunct, but not an alternative, to SMBG. Disclosure M. Tanizawa: None. H. Takahashi: None. Y. Mori: None. K. Utsunomiya: None.