Notice: Users may be experiencing issues with displaying some pages on stanfordhealthcare.org. We are working closely with our technical teams to resolve the issue as quickly as possible. Thank you for your patience.
 

Learn about the flu shot, COVID-19 vaccine, and our masking policy »

Stanford Health Care

Full closed loop open-source algorithm performance comparison in pigs with diabetes. Clinical and translational medicine Lal, R. A., Maikawa, C. L., Lewis, D., Baker, S. W., Smith, A. A., Roth, G. A., Gale, E. C., Stapleton, L. M., Mann, J. L., Yu, A. C., Correa, S., Grosskopf, A. K., Liong, C. S., Meis, C. M., Chan, D., Garner, J. P., Maahs, D. M., Buckingham, B. A., Appel, E. A. 2021; 11 (4): e387

Abstract

Understanding how automated insulin delivery (AID) algorithm features impact glucose control under full closed loop delivery represents a critical step toward reducing patient burden by eliminating the need for carbohydrate entries at mealtimes. Here, we use a pig model of diabetes to compare AndroidAPS and Loop open-source AID systems without meal announcements. Overall time-in-range (70-180mg/dl) for AndroidAPS was 58% ± 5%, while time-in-range for Loop was 35% ± 5%. The effect of the algorithms on time-in-range differed between meals and overnight. During the overnight monitoring period, pigs had an average time-in-range of 90% ± 7% when on AndroidAPS compared to 22% ± 8% on Loop. Time-in-hypoglycemia also differed significantly during the lunch meal, whereby pigs running AndroidAPS spent an average of 1.4% (+0.4/-0.8)% in hypoglycemia compared to 10% (+3/-6)% for those using Loop. As algorithm design for closed loop systems continues to develop, the strategies employed in the OpenAPS algorithm (known as oref1) as implemented in AndroidAPS for unannounced meals may result in a better overall control for full closed loop systems.

View details for DOI 10.1002/ctm2.387

View details for PubMedID 33931977