BACKGROUND: Glycemic control in critically ill patients decreases infection and mortality. Patients receiving vasopressors have altered peripheral perfusion, which may affect accuracy of capillary blood glucose values measured with point-of-care devices. OBJECTIVES: To compare capillary and arterial glucose values measured via point-of-care testing (POCT) with arterial glucose values measured via clinical chemistry laboratory testing (CCLT) in patients after cardiothoracic surgery. To determine if vasopressors or diminished peripheral perfusion influence the accuracy of POCT values. METHODS: In a prospective, convenience sample of 50 adult postoperative cardiothoracic patients receiving insulin and vasopressors, 162 samples were obtained simultaneously from capillary and arterial sites during insulin infusion and tested via both POCT and CCLT. Clarke error grid analysis and ISO 15197 were used to analyze level of agreement. Two-way analysis of variance was used to analyze differences in glucose values with respect to vasopressor use and peripheral perfusion. RESULTS: An unacceptable level of agreement was found between the capillary POCT results and arterial CCLT results (only 88.3% of values fell in zone A, or within the ISO 15197 tolerance bands). Arterial POCT results showed acceptable (94.4%) agreement with CCLT results. Vasopressor use had a significant effect on the accuracy of arterial blood glucose values (F=15.01; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Even when the more accurate POCT with arterial blood is used, blood glucose values are significantly less accurate in patients receiving more than 2 vasopressors than in patients receiving fewer vasopressors. CCLT may be safer for titrating insulin doses in these patients.
BACKGROUND: Glycemic control in critically illpatientsdecreases infection and mortality. Patients receiving vasopressors have altered peripheral perfusion, which may affect accuracy of capillary blood glucose values measured with point-of-care devices. OBJECTIVES: To compare capillary and arterial glucose values measured via point-of-care testing (POCT) with arterial glucose values measured via clinical chemistry laboratory testing (CCLT) in patients after cardiothoracic surgery. To determine if vasopressors or diminished peripheral perfusion influence the accuracy of POCT values. METHODS: In a prospective, convenience sample of 50 adult postoperative cardiothoracicpatients receiving insulin and vasopressors, 162 samples were obtained simultaneously from capillary and arterial sites during insulin infusion and tested via both POCT and CCLT. Clarke error grid analysis and ISO 15197 were used to analyze level of agreement. Two-way analysis of variance was used to analyze differences in glucose values with respect to vasopressor use and peripheral perfusion. RESULTS: An unacceptable level of agreement was found between the capillary POCT results and arterial CCLT results (only 88.3% of values fell in zone A, or within the ISO 15197 tolerance bands). Arterial POCT results showed acceptable (94.4%) agreement with CCLT results. Vasopressor use had a significant effect on the accuracy of arterial blood glucose values (F=15.01; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Even when the more accurate POCT with arterial blood is used, blood glucose values are significantly less accurate in patients receiving more than 2 vasopressors than in patients receiving fewer vasopressors. CCLT may be safer for titrating insulin doses in these patients.
Authors: G van den Berghe; P Wouters; F Weekers; C Verwaest; F Bruyninckx; M Schetz; D Vlasselaers; P Ferdinande; P Lauwers; R Bouillon Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2001-11-08 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: 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 Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-03-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Harold L Lazar; Marie McDonnell; Stuart R Chipkin; Anthony P Furnary; Richard M Engelman; Archana R Sadhu; Charles R Bridges; Constance K Haan; Rolf Svedjeholm; Heinrich Taegtmeyer; Richard J Shemin Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Joseph J DuBose; Kenji Inaba; Bernardino C Branco; Galinos Barmparas; Lydia Lam; Pedro G R Teixeira; Howard Belzberg; Demetrios Demetriades Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2012-04-22 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: H F Sylvain; M E Pokorny; S M English; N H Benson; T W Whitley; C J Ferenczy; J G Harrison Journal: Am J Crit Care Date: 1995-01 Impact factor: 2.228
Authors: Salmaan Kanji; Jennifer Buffie; Brian Hutton; Peter S Bunting; Avinder Singh; Kevin McDonald; Dean Fergusson; Lauralyn A McIntyre; Paul C Hebert Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Frank M Brunkhorst; Christoph Engel; Frank Bloos; Andreas Meier-Hellmann; Max Ragaller; Norbert Weiler; Onnen Moerer; Matthias Gruendling; Michael Oppert; Stefan Grond; Derk Olthoff; Ulrich Jaschinski; Stefan John; Rolf Rossaint; Tobias Welte; Martin Schaefer; Peter Kern; Evelyn Kuhnt; Michael Kiehntopf; Christiane Hartog; Charles Natanson; Markus Loeffler; Konrad Reinhart Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-01-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Brad S Karon; Leslie J Donato; Chelsie M Larsen; Lindsay K Siebenaler; Amy E Wells; Christina M Wood-Wentz; Mary E Shirk-Marienau; Timothy B Curry Journal: Anesthesiology Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 7.892