M Umbrello1, V Salice2, P Spanu3, P Formenti3, A Barassi4, G V Melzi d'Eril4, G Iapichino5. 1. Unità Operativa di Anestesia e Rianimazione, Azienda Ospedaliera San Paolo - Polo Universitario, Italy. Electronic address: michele.umbrello@ao-sanpaolo.it. 2. Dipartimento di Fisiopatologia Medico-Chirurgica e dei Trapianti, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy. 3. Unità Operativa di Anestesia e Rianimazione, Azienda Ospedaliera San Paolo - Polo Universitario, Italy. 4. Dipartimento di Scienze della Salute, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy. 5. Unità Operativa di Anestesia e Rianimazione, Azienda Ospedaliera San Paolo - Polo Universitario, Italy; Dipartimento di Fisiopatologia Medico-Chirurgica e dei Trapianti, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The optimal level and modality of glucose control in critically ill patients is still debated. A protocolized approach and the use of nearly-continuous technologies are recommended to manage hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia and glycemic variability. We recently proposed a pato-physiology-based glucose control protocol which takes into account patient glucose/carbohydrate intake and insulin resistance. Aim of the present investigation was to assess the performance of our protocol with an automated intermittent plasma glucose monitoring device (OptiScanner™ 5000). METHODS: OptiScanner™ was used in 6 septic patients, providing glucose measurement every 15' from a side-port of an indwelling central venous catheter. Target level of glucose was 80-150 mg/dL. Insulin infusion and kcal with nutritional support were also recorded. RESULTS: 6 septic patients were studied for 319 h (1277 measurements); 58 [45-65] hours for each patient (measurements/patient: 231 [172-265]). Blood glucose was at target for 93 [90-98]% of study time. Mean plasma glucose was 126 ± 11 mg/dL. Only 3 hypoglycemic episodes (78, 78, 69 mg/dL) were recorded. Glucose variability was limited: plasma glucose coefficient of variation was 11.7 ± 4.0% and plasma glucose standard deviation was 14.3 ± 5.5 mg/dL. CONCLUSIONS: The local glucose control protocol achieved satisfactory glucose control in septic patients along with a high degree of safeness. Automated intermittent plasma glucose monitoring seemed useful to assess the performance of the protocol.
BACKGROUND & AIMS: The optimal level and modality of glucose control in critically illpatients is still debated. A protocolized approach and the use of nearly-continuous technologies are recommended to manage hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia and glycemic variability. We recently proposed a pato-physiology-based glucose control protocol which takes into account patientglucose/carbohydrate intake and insulin resistance. Aim of the present investigation was to assess the performance of our protocol with an automated intermittent plasma glucose monitoring device (OptiScanner™ 5000). METHODS: OptiScanner™ was used in 6 septic patients, providing glucose measurement every 15' from a side-port of an indwelling central venous catheter. Target level of glucose was 80-150 mg/dL. Insulin infusion and kcal with nutritional support were also recorded. RESULTS: 6 septic patients were studied for 319 h (1277 measurements); 58 [45-65] hours for each patient (measurements/patient: 231 [172-265]). Blood glucose was at target for 93 [90-98]% of study time. Mean plasma glucose was 126 ± 11 mg/dL. Only 3 hypoglycemic episodes (78, 78, 69 mg/dL) were recorded. Glucose variability was limited: plasma glucose coefficient of variation was 11.7 ± 4.0% and plasma glucose standard deviation was 14.3 ± 5.5 mg/dL. CONCLUSIONS: The local glucose control protocol achieved satisfactory glucose control in septic patients along with a high degree of safeness. Automated intermittent plasma glucose monitoring seemed useful to assess the performance of the protocol.
Authors: Georgia M Davis; Rodolfo J Galindo; Alexandra L Migdal; Guillermo E Umpierrez Journal: Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am Date: 2020-03 Impact factor: 4.741
Authors: Amisha Wallia; Guillermo E Umpierrez; Robert J Rushakoff; David C Klonoff; Daniel J Rubin; Sherita Hill Golden; Curtiss B Cook; Bithika Thompson Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2017-04-21
Authors: Rodolfo J Galindo; Guillermo E Umpierrez; Robert J Rushakoff; Ananda Basu; Suzanne Lohnes; James H Nichols; Elias K Spanakis; Juan Espinoza; Nadine E Palermo; Dessa Garnett Awadjie; Leigh Bak; Bruce Buckingham; Curtiss B Cook; Guido Freckmann; Lutz Heinemann; Roman Hovorka; Nestoras Mathioudakis; Tonya Newman; David N O'Neal; Michaela Rickert; David B Sacks; Jane Jeffrie Seley; Amisha Wallia; Trisha Shang; Jennifer Y Zhang; Julia Han; David C Klonoff Journal: J Diabetes Sci Technol Date: 2020-09-28