Continuous glucose monitoring in diabetes management – evidence, applications, and future perspectives: A comprehensive review of recent developments
More details
Hide details
1
Szpital Wolski im. dr Anny Gostyńskiej Sp. z o.o. / Dr. Anna Gostyńska Wolski Hospital, Warsaw, Poland
2
Warszawski Szpital Południowy Sp. z o.o. / Warsaw Southern Hospital, Warsaw, Poland
3
Szpital Praski p.w. Przemienienia Pańskiego Sp. z o.o. / Praski Hospital of the Transfiguration of Our Lord, Warsaw, Poland
Corresponding author
Michał Kotowicz
Szpital Wolski im. dr Anny Gostyńskiej, ul. Marcina Kasprzaka 17, 01-211 Warszawa
Ann. Acad. Med. Siles. 2026;80:227-232
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) represents a major advancement in diabetes management, offering continuous assessment of interstitial glucose levels and real-time feedback that supports more precise glycemic control. This technology, which can operate as intermittently scanned or real-time systems, provides dynamic insights into glucose fluctuations that conventional methods such as self-monitoring of blood glucose and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) fail to capture. CGM has been shown to enhance metabolic stability, increase time in target range, and reduce the frequency of both hypo- and hyperglycemia. In type 2 diabetes, observational and randomized studies have demonstrated improvements in treatment satisfaction, self-efficacy, and quality of life in addition to glycemic outcomes, while population-level data suggest reductions in hospitalizations and healthcare costs. The use of CGM in prediabetes reveals distinct patterns of glucose variability and may facilitate earlier detection of dysglycemia, though its application in this group remains investigational. Among pediatric patients, CGM supports improved metabolic control and early recognition of nocturnal hypoglycemia, yet challenges related to cost, device adherence, and accessibility persist. In pregnant women with diabetes, continuous monitoring has been associated with improved maternal and neonatal outcomes; however, regulatory approval and standardized guidelines are still lacking. Despite its growing clinical relevance, CGM research remains limited by study heterogeneity, cost considerations, and incomplete evidence regarding long-term cost-effectiveness. Nevertheless, current data strongly support its role as an integral component of modern diabetes management across diverse patient populations.
FUNDING
This study did not receive specific funding.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
REFERENCES (28)
1.
Langendam M, Luijf YM, Hooft L, Devries JH, Mudde AH, Scholten RJ. Continuous glucose monitoring systems for type 1 diabetes mellitus. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;1(1):CD008101. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008101.pub2.
2.
Townsend RR, Kapoor SC. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1994;330(9):641–642. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199403033300914.
3.
Diabetes Control and Complications Trial Research Group; Nathan DM, Genuth S, Lachin J, Cleary P, Crofford O, Davis M, et al. The effect of intensive treatment of diabetes on the development and progression of long-term complications in insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med. 1993;329(14):977–986. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199309303291401.
4.
Nathan DM, Cleary PA, Backlund JY, Genuth SM, Lachin JM, Orchard TJ, et al. Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(25):2643–2653. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa052187.
5.
Boland E, Monsod T, Delucia M, Brandt CA, Fernando S, Tamborlane WV. Limitations of conventional methods of self-monitoring of blood glucose: lessons learned from 3 days of continuous glucose sensing in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2001;24(11):1858–1862. doi: 10.2337/diacare.24.11.1858.
6.
Brauker J. Continuous glucose sensing: future technology developments. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2009;11(Suppl 1):S25-S36. doi: 10.1089/dia.2008.0137.
7.
Wentholt IM, Hoekstra JB, Devries JH. Continuous glucose monitors: the long-awaited watch dogs? Diabetes Technol Ther. 2007;9(5):399–409. doi: 10.1089/dia.2007.0215.
8.
He J, Chu N, Wan H, Ling J, Xue Y, Leung K, et al. Use of technology in prediabetes and precision prevention. J Diabetes Investig. 2025;16(7):1217–1231. doi: 10.1111/jdi.70057.
9.
American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee. 7. Diabetes Technology: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2025. Diabetes Care. 2025;48(1 Suppl 1):S146–S166. doi: 10.2337/dc25-S007.
10.
Daya NR, Fang M, Wang D, Valint A, Windham BG, Coresh J, et al. Glucose abnormalities detected by continuous glucose monitoring in very old adults with and without diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2025;48(3):416–421. doi: 10.2337/dc24-1990.
11.
Friedman JG, Coyne K, Aleppo G, Szmuilowicz ED. Beyond A1C: exploring continuous glucose monitoring metrics in managing diabetes. Endocr Connect. 2023;12(7):e230085. doi: 10.1530/EC-23-0085.
12.
DiMeglio LA, Evans-Molina C, Oram RA. Type 1 diabetes. Lancet. 2018;391(10138):2449–2462. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31320-5.
13.
Elbalshy M, Haszard J, Smith H, Kuroko S, Galland B, Oliver N, et al. Effect of divergent continuous glucose monitoring technologies on glycaemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Diabet Med. 2022;39(8):e14854. doi: 10.1111/dme.14854.
14.
Riemsma R, Corro Ramos I, Birnie R, Büyükkaramikli N, Armstrong N, Ryder S, et al. Integrated sensor-augmented pump therapy systems [the MiniMed® Paradigm™ Veo system and the Vibe™ and G4® PLATINUM CGM (continuous glucose monitoring) system] for managing blood glucose levels in type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess. 2016;20(17):v–xxxi, 1–251. doi: 10.3310/hta20170.
15.
Aronson R, Abitbol A, Bajaj HS, Cheng AYY, Christopoulos S, Harris SB, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring in noninsulin-treated type 2 diabetes: A critical review of reported trials with an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2025;27(11):6220–6242. doi: 10.1111/dom.70008.
16.
Seidu S, Kunutsor SK, Ajjan RA, Choudhary P. Efficacy and safety of continuous glucose monitoring and intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventional evidence. Diabetes Care. 2024;47(1):169–179. doi: 10.2337/dc23-1520.
17.
Ferreira ROM, Trevisan T, Pasqualotto E, Chavez MP, Marques BF, Lamounier RN, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring systems in noninsulin-treated people with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2024;26(4):252–262. doi: 10.1089/DIA.2023.0390.
18.
Jancev M, Vissers TACM, Visseren FLJ, van Bon AC, Serné EH, DeVries JH, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetologia. 2024;67(5):798–810. doi: 10.1007/s00125-024-06107-6.
19.
Ajjan RA, Battelino T, Cos X, Del Prato S, Philips JC, Meyer L, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring for the routine care of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2024;20(7):426–440. doi: 10.1038/s41574-024-00973-1.
20.
Zahalka SJ, Akturk HK, Galindo RJ, Shah VN, Low Wang CC. Continuous glucose monitoring for prediabetes: roles, evidence, and gaps. Endocr Pract. 2025;31(8):1054–1060. doi: 10.1016/j.eprac.2025.05.742.
21.
Rizos EC, Kanellopoulou A, Filis P, Markozannes G, Chaliasos K, Ntzani EE, et al. Difference on glucose profile from continuous glucose monitoring in people with prediabetes vs. normoglycemic individuals: a matched-pair analysis. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2024;18(2):414–422. doi: 10.1177/19322968221123530.
22.
Zahalka SJ, Galindo RJ, Shah VN, Low Wang CC. Continuous glucose monitoring for prediabetes: what are the best metrics? J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2024;18(4):835–846. doi: 10.1177/19322968241242487.
23.
Shalitin S, Chase HP. Diabetes technology and treatments in the paediatric age group. Int J Clin Pract Suppl. 2011;170:76–82. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2010.02582.x.
24.
O’Malley G, Wang A, Ogyaadu S, Levy CJ. Assessing glycemic control using CGM for women with diabetes in pregnancy. Curr Diab Rep. 2021;21(11):44. doi: 10.1007/s11892-021-01415-2.
25.
Murphy HR, Bell R, Cartwright C, Curnow P, Maresh M, Morgan M, et al. Improved pregnancy outcomes in women with type 1 and type 2 diabetes but substantial clinic-to-clinic variations: a prospective nationwide study. Diabetologia. 2017;60(9):1668–1677. doi: 10.1007/s00125-017-4314-3.
26.
Macintosh MC, Fleming KM, Bailey JA, Doyle P, Modder J, Acolet D, et al. Perinatal mortality and congenital anomalies in babies of women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland: population based study. BMJ. 2006;333(7560):177. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38856.692986.AE.
27.
Feig DS, Donovan LE, Corcoy R, Murphy KE, Amiel SA, Hunt KF, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes (CONCEPTT): a multicentre international randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2017;390(10110):2347–2359. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)32400-5.
28.
Polsky S, Garcetti R, Pyle L, Joshee P, Demmitt JK, Snell-Bergeon JK. Continuous glucose monitor use with and without remote monitoring in pregnant women with type 1 diabetes: A pilot study. PLoS One. 2020;15(4):e0230476. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230476.