Technology & Innovation

Implantable Fluorescence Sensors

Implantable fluorescence sensors represent the primary alternative to standard enzymatic CGMs, utilizing optical detection (fluorescence quenching) rather than electrochemical oxidation. The market is dominated by Senseonics (Eversense), which uses a boronic acid-based hydrogel that binds reversibly with glucose to modulate light signals.

Key Differentiators:

  • Mechanism: Non-consumptive sensing allows for extreme longevity (up to 180 days currently, targeting 365 days).
  • Power: Current implants are passive, requiring an external smart transmitter for inductive power and data readout.
  • Accuracy: Competitive MARD (~8.5%) with high stability against biofouling compared to enzymatic needles.

Major Hurdles:

  • Invasiveness: Requires clinical insertion and removal procedures.
  • Form Factor: The requirement to wear a transmitter over the implant negates the "invisible" benefit of the implant itself.

Future innovation focuses on self-powered implants (internal batteries) to eliminate the external transmitter and extend wear time to one year.

2 min read
Advanced
2 glossary terms
1 citations

Implantable Fluorescence Sensors for Continuous [Glucose Monitoring](/)

Introduction

Implantable fluorescence sensors have emerged as a novel approach to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), differing from traditional enzymatic CGMs by utilizing optical detection through fluorescence quenching rather than electrochemical oxidation [1]. This method is exemplified by Senseonics' Eversense product line, which employs a boronic acid-based hydrogel that binds reversibly with glucose, thereby modulating light signals to indicate glucose levels.

Mechanism and Key Differentiators

The mechanism of action of implantable fluorescence sensors is based on non-consumptive sensing, allowing for extended longevity. Current devices can function for up to 180 days, with plans to extend this duration to 365 days. Key differentiators include:

  • Longevity: Extended operational duration due to non-consumptive sensing.
  • Power Requirement: Passive operation, relying on an external smart transmitter for power supply and data readout.
  • Accuracy and Stability: Competitive Mean Absolute Relative Difference (MARD) values and high stability against biofouling compared to enzymatic CGMs.

Challenges and Limitations

Despite advancements, implantable fluorescence sensors face significant challenges:

  • Invasiveness: Clinical procedures are required for insertion and removal, posing a drawback.
  • Form Factor: The need for an external transmitter negates the potential benefit of a minimally intrusive implant.

Future Directions and Innovations

Ongoing research aims to address these challenges, particularly through the development of self-powered implants. Integrating internal batteries could eliminate the need for an external transmitter, potentially extending wear time and addressing form factor issues.

Conclusion

Implantable fluorescence sensors offer a promising alternative for CGM, with advantages including longevity and stability. However, challenges related to invasiveness and form factor must be addressed. Innovations like self-powered implants are expected to enhance the viability and appeal of these sensors for diabetes management, underscoring the importance of continued research and development in this field.

References

  1. Review of Optical Glucose Sensing TechnologiesSource

Was this article helpful?

Explore More Topics

Continue your CGM research with related categories