A prospective randomised multi-centre controlled trial on tight glucose control by intensive insulin therapy in adult intensive care units: the Glucontrol study.

PURPOSE: An optimal target for glucose control in ICU patients remains unclear. This prospective randomized controlled trial compared the effects on ICU mortality of intensive insulin therapy (IIT) with an intermediate glucose control. METHODS: Adult patients admitted to the 21 participating medico-surgical ICUs were randomized to group 1 (target BG 7.8-10.0 mmol/L) or to group 2 (target BG 4.4-6.1 mmol/L). RESULTS: While the required sample size was 1,750 per group, the trial was stopped early due to a high rate of unintended protocol violations. From 1,101 admissions, the outcomes of 542 patients assigned to group 1 and 536 of group 2 were analysed. The groups were well balanced. BG levels averaged in group 1 8.0 mmol/L (IQR 7.1-9.0) (median of all values) and 7.7 mmol/L (IQR 6.7-8.8) (median of morning BG) versus 6.5 mmol/L (IQR 6.0-7.2) and 6.1 mmol/L (IQR 5.5-6.8) for group 2 (p < 0.0001 for both comparisons). The percentage of patients treated with insulin averaged 66.2 and 96.3%, respectively. Proportion of time spent in target BG was similar, averaging 39.5% and 45.1% (median (IQR) 34.3 (18.5-50.0) and 39.3 (26.2-53.6)%) in the groups 1 and 2, respectively. The rate of hypoglycaemia was higher in the group 2 (8.7%) than in group 1 (2.7%, p < 0.0001). ICU mortality was similar in the two groups (15.3 vs. 17.2%). CONCLUSIONS: In this prematurely stopped and therefore underpowered study, there was a lack of clinical benefit of intensive insulin therapy (target 4.4-6.1 mmol/L), associated with an increased incidence of hypoglycaemia, as compared to a 7.8-10.0 mmol/L target. (ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT00107601, EUDRA-CT Number: 200400391440).

A randomized controlled trial comparing a computer-assisted insulin infusion protocol with a strict and a conventional protocol for glucose control in critically ill patients

Purpose: The objective of this study is to evaluate blood glucose (BG) control efficacy and safety of 3 insulin protocols in medical intensive care unit (MICU) patients. Methods: This was a multicenter randomized controlled trial involving 167 MICU patients with at least one BG measurement +/- 150 mg/dL and one or more of the following: mechanical ventilation, systemic inflammatory response syndrome, trauma, or burns. The interventions were computer-assisted insulin protocol (CAIP), with insulin infusion maintaining BG between 100 and 130 mg/dL; Leuven protocol, with insulin maintaining BG between 80 and 110 mg/dL; or conventional treatment-subcutaneous insulin if glucose > 150 mg/dL. The main efficacy outcome was the mean of patients` median BG, and the safety outcome was the incidence of hypoglycemia (<= 40 mg/dL). Results: The mean of patients` median BG was 125.0, 127.1, and 158.5 mg/dL for CAIP, Leuven, and conventional treatment, respectively (P = .34, CAIP vs Leuven; P < .001, CAIP vs conventional). In CAIP, 12 patients (21.4%) had at least one episode of hypoglycemia vs 24 (41.4%) in Leuven and 2 (3.8%) in conventional treatment (P = .02, CAIP vs Leuven; P = .006, CAIP vs conventional). Conclusions: The CAIP is safer than and as effective as the standard strict protocol for controlling glucose in MICU patients. Hypoglycemia was rare under conventional treatment. However, BG levels were higher than with IV insulin protocols. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Glucose control after severe brain injury.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A substantial body of evidence supports the use of intensive insulin therapy in general critical care practice, particularly in surgical intensive care unit patients. The impact of intensive insulin therapy on the outcome of critically ill neurological patients, however, is still controversial. While avoidance of hyperglycemia is recommended in neurointensive care, no recommendations exist regarding the optimal target for systemic glucose control after severe brain injury. RECENT FINDINGS: An increase in brain metabolic demand leading to a deficiency in cerebral extracellular glucose has been observed in critically ill neurological patients and correlates with poor outcome. In this setting, a reduction of systemic glucose below 6 mmol/l with exogenous insulin has been found to exacerbate brain metabolic distress. Recent studies have confirmed these findings while showing intensive insulin therapy to have no substantial benefit on the outcome of critically ill neurological patients. SUMMARY: Questions persist regarding the optimal target for glucose control after severe brain injury. Further studies are needed to analyze the impact of intensive insulin therapy on brain glucose metabolism and outcome of critically ill neurological patients. According to the available evidence, a less restrictive target for systemic glucose control (6-10 mmol/l) may be more appropriate.

Glucose Control in Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Pilot Randomized Study Controlled by Continuous Glucose Monitoring System Comparing the Use of Insulin Glargine with Standard of Care

Background: This pilot study aimed to verify if glycemic control can be achieved in type 2 diabetes patients after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), using insulin glargine (iGlar) associated with regular insulin (iReg), compared with the standard intensive care unit protocol, which uses continuous insulin intravenous delivery followed by NPH insulin and iReg (St. Care). Patients and Methods: Patients (n = 20) within 24 h of AMI were randomized to iGlar or St. Care. Therapy was guided exclusively by capillary blood glucose (CBG), but glucometric parameters were also analyzed by blinded continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS). Results: Mean glycemia was 141 +/- 39 mg/dL for St. Care and 132 +/- 42 mg/dL for iGlar by CBG or 138 +/- 35 mg/dL for St. Care and 129 +/- 34 mg/dL for iGlar by CGMS. Percentage of time in range (80-180 mg/dL) by CGMS was 73 +/- 18% for iGlar and 77 +/- 11% for St. Care. No severe hypoglycemia (<= 40 mg/dL) was detected by CBG, but CGMS indicated 11 (St. Care) and seven (iGlar) excursions in four subjects from each group, mostly in sulfonylurea users (six of eight patients). Conclusions: This pilot study suggests that equivalent glycemic control without increase in severe hyperglycemia may be achieved using iGlar with background iReg. Data outputs were controlled by both CBG and CGMS measurements in a real-life setting to ensure reliability. Based on CGMS measurements, there were significant numbers of glycemic excursions outside of the target range. However, this was not detected by CBG. In addition, the data indicate that previous use of sulfonylurea may be a potential major risk factor for severe hypoglycemia irrespective of the type of insulin treatment.

Dyslipidemia: a prospective controlled randomized trial of intensive glycemic control in sepsis

Metabolic disturbances are quite common in critically ill patients. Glycemic control appears to be an important adjuvant therapy in such patients. In addition, disorders of lipid metabolism are associated with worse prognoses. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects that two different glycemic control protocols have on lipid profile and metabolism. We evaluated 63 patients hospitalized for severe sepsis or septic shock, over the first 72 h of intensive care. Patients were randomly allocated to receive conservative glycemic control (target range 140-180 mg/dl) or intensive glycemic control (target range 80-110 mg/dl). Serum levels of low-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, triglycerides, total cholesterol, free fatty acids, and oxidized low-density lipoprotein were determined. In both groups, serum levels of low-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, and total cholesterol were below normal, whereas those of free fatty acids, triglycerides, and oxidized low-density lipoprotein were above normal. At 4 h after admission, free fatty acid levels were higher in the conservative group than in the intensive group, progressively decreasing in both groups until hour 48 and continuing to decrease until hour 72 only in the intensive group. Oxidized low-density lipoprotein levels were elevated in both groups throughout the study period. Free fatty acids respond to intensive glycemic control and, because of their high toxicity, can be a therapeutic target in patients with sepsis.

Influence of magnesium status and magnesium intake on the blood glucose control in patients with type 2 diabetes

Background & aims: This study was undertaken to assess magnesium intake and magnesium status in patients with type 2 diabetes, and to identify the parameters that best predict alterations in fasting glucose and plasma magnesium. Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out in patients with type 2 diabetes (n = 51; 53.6 +/- 10.5 y) selected within the inclusion factors, at the University Hospital Onofre Lopes. Magnesium intake was assessed by three 24-h recalls. Urine, plasma and erythrocytes magnesium, fasting and 2-h postprandial glucose, HbA1, microalbuminuria, proteinuria, and serum and urine creatinine were measured. Results: Mean magnesium intake (9.37 +/- 1.76 mmol/d), urine magnesium (2.80 +/- 1.51 mmol/d), plasma magnesium (0.71 +/- 0.08 mmol/L) and erythrocyte magnesium (1.92 +/- 0.23 mmol/L) levels were low. Seventy-seven percent of participants presented one or more magnesium status parameters below the cut-off points of 3.00 mmol/L for urine, 0.75 mmol/L for plasma and 1.65 mmol/L for erythrocytes. Subjects presented poor blood glucose control with fasting glucose of 8.1 +/- 3.7 mmol/L, 2-h postprandial glucose of 11.1 +/- 5.1 mmol/L, and HbA1 of 11.4 +/- 3.0%. The parameters that influenced fasting glucose were urine, plasma and dietary magnesium, while plasma magnesium was influenced by creatinine clearance. Conclusions: Magnesium status was influenced by kidney depuration and was altered in patients with type 2 diabetes, and magnesium showed to play an important role in blood glucose control. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism. All rights reserved.

Blood glucose control in diabetes patients seen in primary health care centers

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated to poor glycemic control among diabetic patients seen at primary health care centers. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was carried out in a sample of 372 diabetic patients attending 32 primary health care centers in southern Brazil. Data on three hierarchical levels of health unit infrastructure, medical care and patient characteristics were collected. RESULTS: The frequency of poor glycemic control was 50.5%. Multivariate analysis (multilevel method) showed that patients with body mass indexes below 27 kg/m², patients on oral hypoglycemic agents or insulin, and patients diagnosed as diabetic over five years prior to the interview were more likely to present poor glycemic control when compared to their counterparts. CONCLUSIONS: Given the hierarchical data structuring, all associations found suggest that factors associated to hyperglycemia are related to patient-level characteristics.

A Gain Scheduling Model Predictive Controller for Blood Glucose Control in Type 1 Diabetes

This paper presents a control strategy for blood glucose(BG) level regulation in type 1 diabetic patients. To design the controller, model-based predictive control scheme has been applied to a newly developed diabetic patient model. The controller is provided with a feedforward loop to improve meal compensation, a gain-scheduling scheme to account for different BG levels, and an asymmetric cost function to reduce hypoglycemic risk. A simulation environment that has been approved for testing of artificial pancreas control algorithms has been used to test thecontroller. The simulation results show a good controller performance in fasting conditions and meal disturbance rejection, and robustness against model–patient mismatch and errors in mealestimation

A Gain Scheduling Model Predictive Controller for Blood Glucose Control in Type 1 Diabetes

This paper presents a control strategy for blood glucose(BG) level regulation in type 1 diabetic patients. To design the controller, model-based predictive control scheme has been applied to a newly developed diabetic patient model. The controller is provided with a feedforward loop to improve meal compensation, a gain-scheduling scheme to account for different BG levels, and an asymmetric cost function to reduce hypoglycemic risk. A simulation environment that has been approved for testing of artificial pancreas control algorithms has been used to test the controller. The simulation results show a good controller performance in fasting conditions and meal disturbance rejection, and robustness against model–patient mismatch and errors in meal estimation

Value of glycaemic control in diabetes

Full text: Several Lancet publications have questioned the value of glycaemic control in diabetic patients. For example, in their Comment (Sept 29, p 1103),1 John Cleland and Stephen Atkin state that “Improved glycaemic control is not a surrogate for effective care of patients who have diabetes”, and Victor Montori and colleagues (p 1104)2 claim that “HbA1c loses its validity as a surrogate marker when patients have a constellation of metabolic abnormalities”. We are concerned that the reaction against “glucocentricity” in the field of diabetes has gone too far. Even the UK's National Prescribing Centre website, carrying the National Health Service logo, includes comments that undermine the value of glycaemic control. For example, referring to the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS), this site states that “Compared with ‘conventional control’ there was no benefit from tight control of blood glucose with sulphonylureas or insulin with regard to total mortality, diabetes-related death, macrovascular outcomes or microvascular outcomes, including all the most serious ones such as blindness or kidney failure”.3 It is well established that better glycaemic control reduces long-term microvascular complications in type 1 and type 2 diabetes.4 In type 2 diabetes, the UKPDS reported that a composite microvascular endpoint (retinopathy requiring photocoagulation, vitreous haemorrhage, and fatal or non-fatal renal failure) was reduced by 25% in patients randomised to intensive glucose control (p=0·0099).4 To imply that these are not patient-relevant outcomes is to distort the evidence. Many studies have also found that improved glycaemic control reduces macrovascular complications.5 Do not be misled: glycaemic control remains a crucial component in the care of people with diabetes. The authors have received research support and undertaken ad hoc consultancies and speaker engagements for several pharmaceutical companies.

Association between obstructive sleep apnea severity and glucose control in patients with untreated versus treated diabetes

International audience

Diabetes, hyperglycemia and the management of cerebrovascular disease

Purpose of review Hyperglycemia is frequent in patients with cerebrovascular disease. This review article aims to summarize the recent evidence from observational studies that examined the adverse cerebrovascular effects of dysglycemic states as well as interventional studies assessing intensive management strategies for hyperglycemia. Recent findings In recent years, diabetes, prediabetic states and insulin resistance and their association with cerebrovascular disease were an important focus of research. The cerebrovascular consequences of these metabolic abnormalities were found to extend beyond ischemic stroke to covert brain infarcts, other structural brain changes and to cognitive impairment with and without dementia. Interventional studies did not reveal that more intensive management of chronic hyperglycemia and of hyperglycemia in the setting of acute stroke improves outcome. There is clear evidence, however, that the overall management of multiple risk factors and behavior modification in patients with dysglycemia may reduce the burden of cerebrovascular disease. Summary Observational studies reveal the growing burden and adverse cerebrovascular effects of dysglycemic states. Currently available interventional studies assessing more intensive strategies for the management of hyperglycemia did not prove, however, to be effective. We discuss the current evidence, pathophysiological considerations and management implications.

What are the practical implications for treating diabetes in light of recent evidence? Updated recommendations from the Global Partnership for Effective Diabetes Management

The Global Partnership for Effective Diabetes Management was established in 2004 to provide practical guidance to improving glycaemic control for people with type 2 diabetes. Those recommendations have been updated to take account of recent trials assessing the effects of intensive glucose control. We continue to emphasis the importance of early and sustained glycaemic control, aiming for HbA( 1c) 6.5-7% wherever safe and appropriate. Individualisation of targets and the management process is strongly encouraged to accommodate patient circumstances and to avoid hypoglycaemia. Prompt introduction of combinations of agents is suggested when monotherapy is inadequate.Treatments will preferably address the underlying pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes and integrate within a wider programme of care which also aims to reduce modifiable cardiovascular risk factors and better equip patients in the self-management of their condition.

Hypoglycaemia:a limiting factor

Recent trials of intensive glucose control (for example ACCORD, ADVANCE and VADT) have re-focussed attention on the problem of hypoglycaemia. Definitions of hypoglycaemia and gradings of intensity vary between studies, making direct comparisons difficult. This in turn has contributed to continued debate over the prevalence, impact and costs of hypoglycaemia.