The Optimising Cardiac Surgery ouTcOmes in People with diabeteS (OCTOPuS) randomised controlled trial to evaluate an outpatient pre-cardiac surgery diabetes management intervention: a study protocol

Days at home alive after major surgery in patients with and without diabetes: an observational cohort study

OBJECTIVE

We hypothesized that days at home alive up to 30 days after surgery (DAH30), a novel patient-centered outcome metric, as well as long-term mortality, would be impaired in patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) undergoing major surgery.

METHODS

This cohort study investigated patients > 18 years with and without DM presenting for major non-cardiovascular, non-ambulatory surgical procedures at 23 hospitals in Sweden between 2007 and 2014. We identified 290,306 patients. Data were matched with various quality registers. The primary outcome was the composite score, DAH30. The secondary outcome was mortality from 31 to 365 days. Using multivariable logistic regression, significant independent risk factors influencing the primary and secondary outcomes were identified, and their adjusted odds ratios were calculated.

RESULTS

Patients with DM type 1 and 2 had significantly lower DAH30 as compared to non-diabetics. Patients with DM were older, had higher co-morbid burden, and needed more emergency surgery. After adjustment for illness severity and age, the odds of having a DAH30 less than 15, indicating death and/or complications, were significantly increased for both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. In the year after surgery, DM patients had a higher mortality as compared to those without diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this large cohort study are likely broadly generalizable. To optimize patient and societal outcomes, specific perioperative care pathways for patients with diabetes should be evaluated.

Gaps in our knowledge of managing inpatient dysglycaemia and diabetes in non-critically ill adults: A call for further research

AIMS

To describe the gaps in knowledge for the care of people in the hospital who have dysglycaemia or diabetes.

METHODS

A review of the current literature and the authors' knowledge of the subject.

RESULTS

Recent data has suggested that the prevalence of hospitalised people with diabetes is approximately three times the prevalence in the general population and is growing annually. A wealth of observational data over the last 4 decades has shown that people with hyperglycaemia, severe hypoglycaemia or diabetes, all experience more harm whilst in the hospital than those who do not have the condition. This often equates to a longer length of stay and thus higher costs. To date, the proportion of federal funding aimed at addressing the harms that people with dysglycaemia experience in hospitals has been very small compared to outpatient studies. National organisations, such as the Joint British Diabetes Societies for Inpatient Care, the American Diabetes Association and the Endocrine Society have produced guidelines or consensus statements on the management of various aspects of inpatient care. However, whilst a lot of these have been based on evidence, much remains based on expert opinion and thus low-quality evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights that inpatient diabetes is an underfunded and under-researched area.

Prehabilitation of Cardiac Surgical Patients, Part 1: Anemia, Diabetes Mellitus, Obesity, Sleep Apnea, and Cardiac Rehabilitation

The concept of "prehabilitation" consists of screening for and identification of pre-existing disorders followed by medical optimization. This is performed for many types of surgery, but may have profound impacts on outcomes particularly in cardiac surgery given the multiple comorbidities typically carried by these patients. Components of prehabilitation include direct medical intervention by preoperative specialists as well as significant care coordination and shared decision making. In this two-part review, the authors describe existing evidence to support the optimization of various preoperative problems and present a few institutional protocols utilized by our center for cardiac presurgical care. This first installment will focus on the management of anemia, obesity, sleep apnea, diabetes, and cardiac rehabilitation prior to surgery. The second will focus on frailty, malnutrition, respiratory disease, alcohol and smoking cessation, and depression.

Diabetes mellitus and perioperative outcomes: a scoping review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is frequently encountered in the perioperative period. DM may increase the risk of adverse perioperative outcomes owing to the potential vascular complications of DM. We conducted a scoping review to examine the association between DM and adverse perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic search strategy of the published literature was built and applied in multiple databases. Observational studies examining the association between DM and adverse perioperative outcomes were included. Abstract screening determined full texts suitable for inclusion. Core information was extracted from each of the included studies including study design, definition of DM, type of DM, surgical specialties, and outcomes. Only primary outcomes are reported in this review.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 2363 records. Of those, 61 were included and 28 were excluded with justification. DM was mostly defined by either haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) or blood glucose values (19 studies each). Other definitions included 'prior diagnosis' or use of medication. In 17 studies the definition was unclear. Type 2 DM was the most frequently studied subtype. Five of seven studies found DM was associated with mortality, 5/13 reported an association with 'complications' (as a composite measure), and 12/17 studies found DM was associated with 'infection'. Overall, 33/61 studies reported that DM was associated with the primary outcome measure.

CONCLUSION

Diabetes mellitus is inconsistently defined in the published literature, which limits the potential for pooled analysis. Further research is necessary to determine which cohort of patients with DM are most at risk of adverse postoperative outcomes, and how control influences this association.

Restrictive versus liberal transfusion in patients with diabetes undergoing cardiac surgery: An open-label, randomized, blinded outcome evaluation trial

AIM

To characterize the association between diabetes and transfusion and clinical outcomes in cardiac surgery, and to evaluate whether restrictive transfusion thresholds are harmful in these patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The multinational, open-label, randomized controlled TRICS-III trial assessed a restrictive transfusion strategy (haemoglobin [Hb] transfusion threshold <75 g/L) compared with a liberal strategy (Hb <95 g/L for operating room or intensive care unit; or <85 g/L for ward) in patients undergoing cardiac surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass with a moderate-to-high risk of death (EuroSCORE ≥6). Diabetes status was collected preoperatively. The primary composite outcome was all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and new-onset renal failure requiring dialysis at 6 months. Secondary outcomes included components of the composite outcome at 6 months, and transfusion and clinical outcomes at 28 days.

RESULTS

Of the 5092 patients analysed, 1396 (27.4%) had diabetes (restrictive, n = 679; liberal, n = 717). Patients with diabetes had more cardiovascular disease than patients without diabetes. Neither the presence of diabetes (OR [95% CI] 1.10 [0.93-1.31]) nor the restrictive strategy increased the risk for the primary composite outcome (diabetes OR [95% CI] 1.04 [0.68-1.59] vs. no diabetes OR 1.02 [0.85-1.22]; P_interaction  = .92). In patients with versus without diabetes, a restrictive transfusion strategy was more effective at reducing red blood cell transfusion (diabetes OR [95% CI] 0.28 [0.21-0.36]; no diabetes OR [95% CI] 0.40 [0.35-0.47]; P_interaction  = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of diabetes did not modify the effect of a restrictive transfusion strategy on the primary composite outcome, but improved its efficacy on red cell transfusion. Restrictive transfusion triggers are safe and effective in patients with diabetes undergoing cardiac surgery.