Literature DB >> 19318384

Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients.

Simon Finfer, Dean R Chittock, Steve Yu-Shuo Su, Deborah Blair, Denise Foster, Vinay Dhingra, Rinaldo Bellomo, Deborah Cook, Peter Dodek, William R Henderson, Paul C Hébert, Stephane Heritier, Daren K Heyland, Colin McArthur, Ellen McDonald, Imogen Mitchell, John A Myburgh, Robyn Norton, Julie Potter, Bruce G Robinson, Juan J Ronco.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The optimal target range for blood glucose in critically ill patients remains unclear.
METHODS: Within 24 hours after admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), adults who were expected to require treatment in the ICU on 3 or more consecutive days were randomly assigned to undergo either intensive glucose control, with a target blood glucose range of 81 to 108 mg per deciliter (4.5 to 6.0 mmol per liter), or conventional glucose control, with a target of 180 mg or less per deciliter (10.0 mmol or less per liter). We defined the primary end point as death from any cause within 90 days after randomization.
RESULTS: Of the 6104 patients who underwent randomization, 3054 were assigned to undergo intensive control and 3050 to undergo conventional control; data with regard to the primary outcome at day 90 were available for 3010 and 3012 patients, respectively. The two groups had similar characteristics at baseline. A total of 829 patients (27.5%) in the intensive-control group and 751 (24.9%) in the conventional-control group died (odds ratio for intensive control, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.28; P=0.02). The treatment effect did not differ significantly between operative (surgical) patients and nonoperative (medical) patients (odds ratio for death in the intensive-control group, 1.31 and 1.07, respectively; P=0.10). Severe hypoglycemia (blood glucose level, < or = 40 mg per deciliter [2.2 mmol per liter]) was reported in 206 of 3016 patients (6.8%) in the intensive-control group and 15 of 3014 (0.5%) in the conventional-control group (P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups in the median number of days in the ICU (P=0.84) or hospital (P=0.86) or the median number of days of mechanical ventilation (P=0.56) or renal-replacement therapy (P=0.39).
CONCLUSIONS: In this large, international, randomized trial, we found that intensive glucose control increased mortality among adults in the ICU: a blood glucose target of 180 mg or less per deciliter resulted in lower mortality than did a target of 81 to 108 mg per deciliter. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00220987.) 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19318384     DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0810625

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  1138 in total

1.  Glucose information for tight glycemic control: different methods with different challenges.

Authors:  Christian Weber; Kurt Neeser
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2010-09-01

Review 2.  2011 ACCF/AHA focused update of the guidelines for the management of patients with Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (updating the 2007 Guideline): highlights for the clinician.

Authors:  Nanette K Wenger
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 2.882

Review 3.  Year in review 2010: Critical Care--Multiple organ dysfunction and sepsis.

Authors:  Etienne de Montmollin; Djillali Annane
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2011-12-05       Impact factor: 9.097

4.  Lack of association between hyperglycaemia at arrival and clinical outcomes in acute stroke patients treated with tissue plasminogen activator.

Authors:  William J Meurer; Phillip A Scott; Angela F Caveney; Jennifer J Majersik; Shirley M Frederiksen; Annette Sandretto; Ann B Holden; Robert Silbergleit
Journal:  Int J Stroke       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 5.266

5.  Finding the sweet spot: identification of optimal glucose levels in critically injured patients.

Authors:  Matthew E Kutcher; Marci B Pepper; Diane Morabito; Dharma Sunjaya; M Margaret Knudson; Mitchell Jay Cohen
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2011-11

6.  Accuracy and reliability of a subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring device in critically ill patients.

Authors:  S Rijkenberg; S C van Steen; J H DeVries; P H J van der Voort
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 2.502

7.  Inpatient Management of Diabetes Mellitus among Noncritically Ill Patients at University Hospital of Puerto Rico.

Authors:  Myriam Zaydee Allende-Vigo; Rafael A González-Rosario; Loida González; Viviana Sánchez; Mónica A Vega; Milliette Alvarado; Raul O Ramón
Journal:  Endocr Pract       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 3.443

8.  Impact of inpatient diabetes management, education, and improved discharge transition on glycemic control 12 months after discharge.

Authors:  Deborah J Wexler; Catherine C Beauharnais; Susan Regan; David M Nathan; Enrico Cagliero; Mary E Larkin
Journal:  Diabetes Res Clin Pract       Date:  2012-10-01       Impact factor: 5.602

Review 9.  Post-resuscitation care following out-of-hospital and in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Saket Girotra; Paul S Chan; Steven M Bradley
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 10.  Meaningful outcome measures in cardiac surgery.

Authors:  Paul S Myles
Journal:  J Extra Corpor Technol       Date:  2014-03
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.