Literature DB >> 22929365

STAR development and protocol comparison.

Liam M Fisk1, Aaron J Le Compte, Geoffrey M Shaw, Sophie Penning, Thomas Desaive, J Geoffrey Chase.   

Abstract

Accurate glycemic control (AGC) is difficult due to excessive hypoglycemia risk. Stochastic TARgeted (STAR) glycemic control forecasts changes in insulin sensitivity to calculate a range of glycemic outcomes for an insulin intervention, creating a risk framework to improve safety and performance. An improved, simplified STAR framework was developed to reduce light hypoglycemia and clinical effort, while improving nutrition rates and performance. Blood glucose (BG) levels are targeted to 80-145 mg/dL, using insulin and nutrition control for 1-3 h interventions. Insulin changes are limited to +3U/h and nutrition to ±30% of goal rate (minimum 30%). All targets and rate change limits are clinically specified and generalizable. Clinically validated virtual trials were run on using clinical data from 371 patients (39841 h) from the Specialized Relative Insulin and Nutrition Tables (SPRINT) cohort. Cohort and per-patient results are compared to clinical SPRINT data, and virtual trials of three published protocols. Performance was measured as time within glycemic bands, and safety by patients with severe (BG < 40 mg/dL) and mild (%BG < 72 mg/dL) hypoglycemia. Pilot trial results from the first ten patients (1486 h) are included to support the in-silico findings. In both virtual and clinical trials, mild hypoglycemia was below 2% versus 4% for SPRINT. Severe hypoglycemia was reduced from 14 (SPRINT) to 6 (STAR), and 0 in the pilot trial. AGC was tighter than both SPRINT clinical data and in-silico comparison protocols, with 91% BG within the specified target (80-145 mg/dL) in virtual trials and 89.4% in pilot trials. Clinical effort (measurements) was reduced from 16.2/day to 11.8/day (13.5/day in pilot trials). This STAR framework provides safe AGC with significant reductions in hypoglycemia and clinical effort due to stochastic forecasting of patient variation-a unique risk-based approach. Initial pilot trials validate the in-silico design methods and resulting protocol, all of which can be generalized to suit any given clinical environment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22929365     DOI: 10.1109/TBME.2012.2214384

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng        ISSN: 0018-9294            Impact factor:   4.538


  19 in total

1.  Estimating Increased EGP During Stress Response in Critically Ill Patients.

Authors:  Jennifer J Ormsbee; Jennifer L Knopp; J Geoffrey Chase
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2020-06-01

2.  Comment on Kalfon et al.: Tight computerized versus conventional glucose control in the ICU: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Geoffrey M Shaw; Christopher G Pretty; J Geoffrey Chase
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2014-05-07       Impact factor: 17.440

3.  Evolution of insulin sensitivity and its variability in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients treated with hypothermia.

Authors:  Azurahisham Sah Pri; J Geoffrey Chase; Christopher G Pretty; Geoffrey M Shaw; Jean-Charles Preiser; Jean-Louis Vincent; Mauro Oddo; Fabio S Taccone; Sophie Penning; Thomas Desaive
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2014-10-28       Impact factor: 9.097

4.  A C-Peptide-Based Model of Pancreatic Insulin Secretion in Extremely Preterm Neonates in Intensive Care.

Authors:  Jennifer L Dickson; Jane Alsweiler; Cameron A Gunn; Christopher G Pretty; J Geoffrey Chase
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2015-08-07

Review 5.  On the problem of patient-specific endogenous glucose production in neonates on stochastic targeted glycemic control.

Authors:  Jennifer L Dickson; James N Hewett; Cameron A Gunn; Adrienne Lynn; Geoffrey M Shaw; J Geoffrey Chase
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2013-07-01

6.  Continuous Glucose Monitoring Measures Can Be Used for Glycemic Control in the ICU: An In-Silico Study.

Authors:  Tony Zhou; Jennifer L Dickson; Geoffrey M Shaw; J Geoffrey Chase
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2017-11-06

7.  Increased insulin resistance in intensive care: longitudinal retrospective analysis of glycaemic control patients in a New Zealand ICU.

Authors:  Jennifer L Knopp; J Geoffrey Chase; Geoffrey M Shaw
Journal:  Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab       Date:  2021-05-31       Impact factor: 3.565

8.  Estimating Enhanced Endogenous Glucose Production in Intensive Care Unit Patients with Severe Insulin Resistance.

Authors:  Anane Yahia; Ákos Szlávecz; Jennifer L Knopp; Normy Norfiza Abdul Razak; Asma Abu Samah; Geoff Shaw; J Geoffrey Chase; Balazs Benyo
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2021-06-02

9.  Reducing the impact of insulin sensitivity variability on glycaemic outcomes using separate stochastic models within the STAR glycaemic protocol.

Authors:  Felicity Thomas; Christopher G Pretty; Liam Fisk; Geoffrey M Shaw; J Geoffrey Chase; Thomas Desaive
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2014-04-16       Impact factor: 2.819

10.  Safety, efficacy and clinical generalization of the STAR protocol: a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Kent W Stewart; Christopher G Pretty; Hamish Tomlinson; Felicity L Thomas; József Homlok; Szabó Némedi Noémi; Attila Illyés; Geoffrey M Shaw; Balázs Benyó; J Geoffrey Chase
Journal:  Ann Intensive Care       Date:  2016-03-29       Impact factor: 6.925

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.