Intensive insulin therapy versus conventional glycemic control in patients with acute neurological injury: a prospective controlled trial

A systematic review and meta-analysis on glycemic control in traumatic brain injury

BACKGROUND

Hyperglycemia is associated with adverse outcomes in patent with traumatic brain injury. There is convincing evidence of the deleterious effects of early systemic hyperglycemia on neurological outcomes and guides management toward intensive glycemic control. The purpose of this systematic review and meta analysis is to evaluate and summarize the level of evidence on the role of glycemic control in traumatic brain injury.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed following PRISMA guidelines. This review involved studies conducted in humans covering glycemic control in traumatic brain injury. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, EBSCO Host, Scopus, ScienceDirect, Medline, and LILACS from database inception to October 2020. The risk of bias was evaluated with the GRADE quality Scale.

RESULTS

The results of this meta-analysis that involved 1236 patients included in 10 studies suggest that intensive glycemic control did not show significant differences in mortality compared with conservative management (RR 0.99 [95 % CI 0.81-1.21] p = 0.92). Intensive glycemic control reduced the risk of unfavorable clinical outcomes compared to standard management (RR 0.87 [95 % CI 0.78-0.96] p = 0.007) and increased favorable clinical outcomes compared to standard neurocritical care (RR 1.19 [95 % CI 1.02-138] p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

The possible effect of glycemic control could be associated with silent hypoglycemic episodes during intensive care. Further studies evaluating the impact of glycemic control in traumatic brain injury are necessary.

A Patient-Level Meta-Analysis of Intensive Glucose Control in Critically Ill Adults

BACKGROUND

Whether intensive glucose control reduces mortality in critically ill patients remains uncertain. Patient-level meta-analyses can provide more precise estimates of treatment effects than are currently available.

METHODS

We pooled individual patient data from randomized trials investigating intensive glucose control in critically ill adults. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included survival to 90 days and time to live cessation of treatment with vasopressors or inotropes, mechanical ventilation, and newly commenced renal replacement. Severe hypoglycemia was a safety outcome.

RESULTS

Of 38 eligible trials (n=29,537 participants), 20 (n=14,171 participants) provided individual patient data including in-hospital mortality status for 7059 and 7049 participants allocated to intensive and conventional glucose control, respectively. Of these 1930 (27.3%) and 1891 (26.8%) individuals assigned to intensive and conventional control, respectively, died (risk ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96 to 1.07; P=0.52; moderate certainty). There was no apparent heterogeneity of treatment effect on in-hospital mortality in any examined subgroups. Intensive glucose control increased the risk of severe hypoglycemia (risk ratio, 3.38; 95% CI, 2.99 to 3.83; P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive glucose control was not associated with reduced mortality risk but increased the risk of severe hypoglycemia. We did not identify a subgroup of patients in whom intensive glucose control was beneficial. (Funded by the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and others; PROSPERO number CRD42021278869.).

Interventions for improving critical care in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To systematically review the typology, impact, quality of evidence, barriers, and facilitators to implementation of Quality Improvement (QI) interventions for adult critical care in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched on 1st September 2022. The studies were included if they described the implementation of QI interventions for adult critical care in LMICs, available as full text, in English and published after 2000. The risks of bias were assessed using the ROB 2.0/ROBINS-I tools. Intervention strategies were categorised according to a Knowledge Translation framework. Interventions' effectiveness were synthesised by vote counting and assessed with a binomial test. Barriers and facilitators to implementation were narratively synthesised using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research.

RESULTS

78 studies were included. Risk of bias was high. The most common intervention strategies were Education, Audit & Feedback (A&F) and Protocols/Guidelines/Bundles/Checklists (PGBC). Two multifaceted strategies improved both process and outcome measures: Education and A&F (p = 0.008); and PGBC with Education and A&F (p = 0.001, p < 0.001). Facilitators to implementation were stakeholder engagement, organisational readiness for implementation, and adaptability of interventions. Barriers were lack of resources and incompatibility with clinical workflows.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence for QI in critical care in LMICs is sparse and at high risk of bias but suggests that multifaceted interventions are most effective. Co-designing interventions with and engaging stakeholders, communicating relative advantages, employing local champions and adapting to feedback can improve implementation. Hybrid study designs, process evaluations and adherence to reporting guidelines would improve the evidence base.

Society of Critical Care Medicine Guidelines on Glycemic Control for Critically Ill Children and Adults 2024

RATIONALE

Maintaining glycemic control of critically ill patients may impact outcomes such as survival, infection, and neuromuscular recovery, but there is equipoise on the target blood levels, monitoring frequency, and methods.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose was to update the 2012 Society of Critical Care Medicine and American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) guidelines with a new systematic review of the literature and provide actionable guidance for clinicians.

PANEL DESIGN

The total multiprofessional task force of 22, consisting of clinicians and patient/family advocates, and a methodologist applied the processes described in the ACCM guidelines standard operating procedure manual to develop evidence-based recommendations in alignment with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation Approach (GRADE) methodology. Conflict of interest policies were strictly followed in all phases of the guidelines, including panel selection and voting.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Comparator, and Outcomes question related to glycemic management in critically ill children (≥ 42 wk old adjusted gestational age to 18 yr old) and adults, including triggers for initiation of insulin therapy, route of administration, monitoring frequency, role of an explicit decision support tool for protocol maintenance, and methodology for glucose testing. We identified the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak or as a good practice statement. In addition, "In our practice" statements were included when the available evidence was insufficient to support a recommendation, but the panel felt that describing their practice patterns may be appropriate. Additional topics were identified for future research.

RESULTS

This guideline is an update of the guidelines for the use of an insulin infusion for the management of hyperglycemia in critically ill patients. It is intended for adult and pediatric practitioners to reassess current practices and direct research into areas with inadequate literature. The panel issued seven statements related to glycemic control in unselected adults (two good practice statements, four conditional recommendations, one research statement) and seven statements for pediatric patients (two good practice statements, one strong recommendation, one conditional recommendation, two "In our practice" statements, and one research statement), with additional detail on specific subset populations where available.

CONCLUSIONS

The guidelines panel achieved consensus for adults and children regarding a preference for an insulin infusion for the acute management of hyperglycemia with titration guided by an explicit clinical decision support tool and frequent (≤ 1 hr) monitoring intervals during glycemic instability to minimize hypoglycemia and against targeting intensive glucose levels. These recommendations are intended for consideration within the framework of the patient's existing clinical status. Further research is required to evaluate the role of individualized glycemic targets, continuous glucose monitoring systems, explicit decision support tools, and standardized glycemic control metrics.

Association between blood glucose levels and Glasgow Outcome Score in patients with traumatic brain injury: secondary analysis of a randomized trial

Background

Blood glucose levels that are too high or too low after traumatic brain injury (TBI) negatively affect patient prognosis. This study aimed to demonstrate the relationship between blood glucose levels and the Glasgow Outcome Score (GOS) in TBI patients.

Methods

This study was based on a randomized, dual-center, open-label clinical trial. A total of 208 patients who participated in the randomized controlled trial were followed up for 5 years. Information on the disease, laboratory examination, insulin therapy, and surgery for patients with TBI was collected as candidate variables according to clinical importance. Additionally, data on 5-year and 6-month GOS were collected as primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. For multivariate analysis, a generalized additive model (GAM) was used to investigate relationships between blood glucose levels and GOS. The results are presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). We further applied a two- piecewise linear regression model to examine the threshold effect of blood glucose level and GOS.

Results

A total of 182 patients were included in the final analysis. Multivariate GAM analysis revealed that a bell-shaped relationship existed between average blood glucose level and 5-year GOS score or 6-month GOS score. The inflection points of the average blood glucose level were 8.81 (95% CI: 7.43–9.48) mmol/L considering 5-year GOS as the outcome and were 8.88 (95% CI 7.43−9.74) mmol/L considering 6-month GOS score as the outcome. The same analysis revealed that there was also a bell relationship between average blood glucose levels and the favorable outcome group (GOS score ≥ 4) at 5 years or 6 months.

Conclusion

In a population of patients with traumatic brain injury, blood glucose levels were associated with the GOS. There was also a threshold effect between blood glucose levels and the GOS. A blood glucose level that is either too high or too low conveys a poor prognosis.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02161055. Registered on 11 June 2014.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06005-5.

Comparison of intensive insulin therapy and conventional glucose management in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting

Background and Aims

Hyperglycemia during cardiac surgery is a risk factor for postoperative outcomes. Because incidence of diabetes mellitus is increasing in Indian population, we tried to evaluate the western protocol for strict control of blood sugar perioperatively. The main aim of the study was to evaluate glycemic control during coronary artery bypass grafting and to determine whether intensive insulin therapy (IIT) is better than the conventional one.

Material and Methods

A prospective randomized comparative study was conducted to evaluate IIT and conventional management of glucose in 40 patients undergoing on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. Outcomes measured were incidence of hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia, incidence of hypokalemia, prolonged intubation, wound infections, strokes, acute renal failure, new onset arrhythmias, length of stay in ICU and hospital, cardiac arrest and mortality. The statistical analysis was done by using Chi-square test, and paired and unpaired t test.

Results

The diabetic patients had significantly higher mean blood sugar and insulin requirement. The incidence of hyperglycemia was significantly higher in conventional management of blood sugar (P = 0.001), whereas hypoglycemia (P = 0.047) and hypokalemia (P = 0.020) were significantly higher in IIT. There were no significant difference in the incidence of prolonged intubation, wound infection, length of ICU and hospital stay, strokes, acute renal failure, new onset arrhythmias, cardiac arrest, and mortality.

Conclusion

The IIT did not improve the morbidity and mortality in our patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting.

Glycaemic management during the inpatient enteral feeding of people with stroke and diabetes

This paper is an abridged and modified version of guidelines produced by the Joint British Diabetes Societies for inpatient care on glycaemic management during the enteral feeding of people with stroke and diabetes. These were revised in 2017 and have been adapted specifically for Diabetic Medicine. The full version can be found at: www.diabetes.org.uk/joint-british-diabetes-society or https://abcd.care/joint-british-diabetes-societies-jbds-inpatient-care-group. Many people have both diabetes and an acute stroke, and a stanv dard approach to the management of people with stroke is the provision of adequate nutrition. Frequently, this involves a period of enteral feeding if there is impaired ability to swallow food safely. There is currently considerable variability in the management of people with diabetes fed enterally after a stroke, and the evidence base guiding diabetes management in this clinical situation is very weak, although poor glycaemic outcomes in people receiving enteral feeding after stroke may worsen recovery and cause harm. The aim of this document is to provide sensible clinical guidance in this area, written by a multidisciplinary team; this guideline had input from diabetes specialist nurses, diabetologists, dietitians, stroke physicians and pharmacists with expertise in this area, and from UK professional organizations. It is aimed at multidisciplinary teams managing people with stroke and diabetes who require enteral feeding. We recognize that there is limited clinical evidence in this area.

Comparison of intensive versus conventional insulin therapy in traumatic brain injury: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To compare intensive insulin therapy (IIT) and conventional insulin therapy (CIT) on clinical outcomes of patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI).

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, ISI Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IIT to CIT in patients with TBI. Study-level characteristics, intensive care unit (ICU) events, and long-term functional outcomes were extracted from the articles. Meta-analysis was performed with random-effect models.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs comprising 1070 patients were included. Although IIT was associated with better neurologic outcome (GOS > 3) (RR=0.87, 95% CI=0.78-0.97; P=0.01; I²=0%), sensitivity analysis revealed that one study influenced this overall estimate (RR=0.90, 95% CI=0.80-1.01, P=0.07; I²=0%). IIT was strongly associated with higher risk of hypoglycaemia (RR=5.79, 95% CI=3.27-10.26, P<0.01; I²=38%). IIT and CIT did not differ in terms of early or late mortality (RR=0.96, 95% CI=0.79-1.17, P=0.7; I²=0%), infection rate (RR=0.82, 95% CI=0.59-1.14, P=0.23; I²=68%), or ICU length of stay (SMD= -0.14, 95% CI=-0.35 to 0.07, P=0.18; I²=45%0.) Conclusions: IIT did not improve long-term neurologic outcome, mortality, or infection rate and was associated with increased risk of hypoglycaemia. Additional well-designed RCTs with defined TBI subgroups should be performed to generate more powerful conclusions.

Traumatic Brain Injury: At the Crossroads of Neuropathology and Common Metabolic Endocrinopathies

Building on the seminal work by Geoffrey Harris in the 1970s, the neuroendocrinology field, having undergone spectacular growth, has endeavored to understand the mechanisms of hormonal connectivity between the brain and the rest of the body. Given the fundamental role of the brain in the orchestration of endocrine processes through interactions among neurohormones, it is thus not surprising that the structural and/or functional alterations following traumatic brain injury (TBI) can lead to endocrine changes affecting the whole organism. Taking into account that systemic hormones also act on the brain, modifying its structure and biochemistry, and can acutely and chronically affect several neurophysiological endpoints, the question is to what extent preexisting endocrine dysfunction may set the stage for an adverse outcome after TBI. In this review, we provide an overview of some aspects of three common metabolic endocrinopathies, e.g., diabetes mellitus, obesity, and thyroid dysfunction, and how these could be triggered by TBI. In addition, we discuss how the complex endocrine networks are woven into the responses to sudden changes after TBI, as well as some of the potential mechanisms that, separately or synergistically, can influence outcomes after TBI.

Early care of acute hyperglycemia benefits the outcome of traumatic brain injury in rats

OBJECTIVE

Previous animal studies showed contradictory clinical observations on whether acute hyperglycemia contributes to poor outcome in traumatic brain injury (TBI). Herein, we tried to clarify this issue.

METHODS

Striking with depths of 3.0-4.25mm at right occipitoparietal brain region and with depth of 3.75mm at right/left occipitoparietal or right/left frontoparietal brain region were performed, respectively. Blood glucose and insulin levels were traced every four hours from 1 to 72h after striking. HOMA2-%S and HOMA2-%β were calculated. Modified neurological severity scores (mNSS) were used to evaluate neurological deficit within 72h.

RESULTS

Striking with depths of 3.5-4.25mm induced increase in blood glucose lasting up to 24h after striking. The levels of blood glucose after striking with depths of 3.75-4.25mm were significantly different from that of striking with the depth of 3.0mm. Striking with depth of 3.75mm at right/left occipitoparietal region induced higher blood glucose in 24h than that at right/left frontoparietal region. Insulin concentration increased slowly during 72h after striking. Striking also induced decrease in insulin sensitivity and secretion lasting 72h. Evaluation of mNSS revealed that severe striking (beyond 3.75mm) worsened nerve function than slight striking (<3.0mm). Intervention of acute hyperglycemia could decrease the mNSS from 2 to 7 days after TBI.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggested that only severe TBI could induce acute hyperglycemia by itself, and early care of acute hyperglycemia could benefit the outcome of TBI patients.

Critical illness-induced dysglycemia and the brain

PURPOSE

Dysglycemia is a characteristic feature of critical illness associated with adverse outcome. Whether dysglycemia contributes to brain dysfunction during critical illness and long-term neurological complications is unclear. We give an overview of glucose metabolism in the brain and review the literature on critical illness-induced dysglycemia and the brain.

METHODS

Medline database search using relevant search terms on dysglycemia, critical illness, acute brain injury/dysfunction, and randomized controlled trial.

RESULTS

Hyperglycemia has been associated with deleterious effects on the nervous system. Underlying mechanisms in critical illness remain largely speculative and are often extrapolated from knowledge in diabetes mellitus. Increased hyperglycemia-induced blood-brain barrier permeability, oxidative stress, and microglia activation may play a role and compromise neuronal and glial cell integrity. Hypoglycemia is feared as critically ill patients cannot recognize or communicate hypoglycemic symptoms, which furthermore are masked by sedation and analgesia. However, observational data on the impact of brief hypoglycemia on the brain in critical illness are controversial. Secondary analysis of two large randomized studies suggested neuroprotection by strict glycemic control with insulin during intensive care, with lowered intracranial pressure, reduction of seizures, and better long-term rehabilitation in patients with isolated brain injury, and reduced incidence of critical illness polyneuromyopathy in the general critically ill patient population. Several subsequent studies failed to reproduce neurological benefit, likely explained by methodological issues, which include divergent achieved glucose levels and inaccurate glucose monitoring tools.

CONCLUSIONS

Preventing hyperglycemia during critical illness holds promise as a neuroprotective strategy to preserve brain cell viability and prevent acute brain dysfunction and long-term cognitive impairment in survivors.

Experimental and clinical evidences for glucose control in intensive care: is infused glucose the key point for study interpretation?

Stress-induced hyperglycemia has been considered an adaptive mechanism to stress up to the first intensive insulin therapy trial, which showed a 34% reduction in relative risk of in-hospital mortality when normalizing blood glucose levels. Further trials had conflicting results and, at present, stress-induced hyperglycemia management remains non-consensual. These findings could be explained by discrepancies in trials, notably regarding the approach to treat hyperglycemia: high versus restrictive caloric intake. Stress-induced hyperglycemia is a frequent complication during intensive care unit stay and is associated with a higher mortality. It results from an imbalance between insulin and counter-regulatory hormones, increased neoglucogenesis, and the cytokine-induced insulin-resistant state of tissues. In this review, we summarize detrimental effects of hyperglycemia on organs in the critically ill (peripheric and central nervous, liver, immune system, kidney, and cardiovascular system). Finally, we show clinical and experimental evidence of potential benefits from glucose and insulin administration, notably on metabolism, immunity, and the cardiovascular system.

Optimal glycemic control in neurocritical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Hyper- and hypoglycemia are strongly associated with adverse outcomes in critical care. Neurologically injured patients are a unique subgroup, where optimal glycemic targets may differ, such that the findings of clinical trials involving heterogeneous critically ill patients may not apply.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intensive insulin therapy with conventional glycemic control among patients with traumatic brain injury, ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, anoxic encephalopathy, central nervous system infections or spinal cord injury.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs, involving 1248 neurocritical care patients, were included. Glycemic targets with intensive insulin ranged from 70-140 mg/dl (3.9-7.8 mmol/L), while conventional protocols aimed to keep glucose levels below 144-300 mg/dl (8.0-16.7 mmol/L). Tight glycemic control had no impact on mortality (RR 0.99; 95% CI 0.83-1.17; p = 0.88), but did result in fewer unfavorable neurological outcomes (RR 0.91; 95% CI 0.84-1.00; p = 0.04). However, improved outcomes were only observed when glucose levels in the conventional glycemic control group were permitted to be relatively high [threshold for insulin administration > 200 mg/dl (> 11.1 mmol/L)], but not with more intermediate glycemic targets [threshold for insulin administration 140-180 mg/dl (7.8-10.0 mmol/L)]. Hypoglycemia was far more common with intensive therapy (RR 3.10; 95% CI 1.54-6.23; p = 0.002), but there was a large degree of heterogeneity in the results of individual trials (Q = 47.9; p<0.0001; I2 = 75%). Mortality was non-significantly higher with intensive insulin in studies where the proportion of patients developing hypoglycemia was large (> 33%) (RR 1.17; 95% CI 0.79-1.75; p = 0.44).

CONCLUSIONS

Intensive insulin therapy significantly increases the risk of hypoglycemia and does not influence mortality among neurocritical care patients. Very loose glucose control is associated with worse neurological recovery and should be avoided. These results suggest that intermediate glycemic goals may be most appropriate.

Intensive insulin therapy in brain injury: a meta-analysis

Many studies have addressed the question of whether intensive insulin therapy (IIT) provides better outcomes for brain-injured patients than does conventional insulin therapy (CIT), with conflicting results. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature to estimate the effect of IIT on patients with brain injury. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and citations of key articles and selected "all randomized controlled trials" (RCTs) comparing the effect of IIT to CIT among adult patients with acute brain injury (traumatic brain injury, stroke, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and encephalitis). Of the 2807 studies, we identified 9 RCTs with a total of 1160 patients for analysis. IIT did not appear to decrease the risk of in-hospital or late mortality (RR=1.04, 95% CI=0.75, 1.43 and RR=1.07, 95%CI=0.91, 1.27 respectively). No significant heterogeneity was found (I(2)=0.0%). IIT also did not have a protective effect on long-term neurological outcomes (LTNO) (RR=1.10, 95% CI=0.96, 1.27). IIT, however, did decrease the rate of infections (RR=0.76, 95% CI=0.58, 0.98). Heterogeneity was present (I(2)=64%), which was eliminated upon sensitivity analysis bringing the RR to 0.66 (95% CI=0.55, 0.80, I(2)=0%). IIT increased the rate of hypoglycemic episodes (RR=1.72, 95% CI=1.20, 2.46) however there was intractable heterogeneity present (I(2)=89%), which did not resolve upon sensitivity analysis. We found no evidence of publication bias by Egger's test (p=0.50). To conclude, IIT has no mortality or LTNO benefit to patients with brain injury, but is beneficial at decreasing infection rates.

Perioperative glucose control in neurosurgical patients

Many neurosurgery patients may have unrecognized diabetes or may develop stress-related hyperglycemia in the perioperative period. Diabetes patients have a higher perioperative risk of complications and have longer hospital stays than individuals without diabetes. Maintenance of euglycemia using intensive insulin therapy (IIT) continues to be investigated as a therapeutic tool to decrease morbidity and mortality associated with derangements in glucose metabolism due to surgery. Suboptimal perioperative glucose control may contribute to increased morbidity, mortality, and aggravate concomitant illnesses. The challenge is to minimize the effects of metabolic derangements on surgical outcomes, reduce blood glucose excursions, and prevent hypoglycemia. Differences in cerebral versus systemic glucose metabolism, time course of cerebral response to injury, and heterogeneity of pathophysiology in the neurosurgical patient populations are important to consider in evaluating the risks and benefits of IIT. While extremes of glucose levels are to be avoided, there are little data to support an optimal blood glucose level or recommend a specific use of IIT for euglycemia maintenance in the perioperative management of neurosurgical patients. Individualized treatment should be based on the local level of blood glucose control, outpatient treatment regimen, presence of complications, nature of the surgical procedure, and type of anesthesia administered.

Efficacy and safety of intensive insulin therapy for critically ill neurologic patients: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether intensive insulin therapy (IIT) may improve clinical outcomes for patients admitted to intensive care units, especially critically ill neurologic patients, is still debated. In the present study, we performed a meta-analysis of literature comparing the efficacy and safety of IIT and conventional insulin therapy (CIT) for critically ill neurologic patients in terms of mortality, infection rate, neurologic outcome, and hypoglycemia.

METHODS

We searched for published reports of studies of randomized control trials (up to March 10, 2011) of patients admitted to neurologic intensive care units and investigated an IIT (target of blood glucose control <120 mg/dL) with a control of CIT. Data were abstracted by a standardized protocol.

RESULTS

We retrieved reports of five studies involving 924 patients. The risk of mortality, infection rate, and neurologic outcome did not differ with IIT or CIT. However, the incidence of hypoglycemic episodes was significantly higher with IIT than CIT (78.8% vs. 48.9%), with a relative risk of 2.62 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-6.43; p < 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

As compared with CIT, IIT may not benefit critically ill neurologic patients in terms of mortality, infection rate, or neurologic outcome and in fact may be associated with increased hypoglycemic complications. Therefore, IIT cannot be recommended over conventional control for critical neurologic disease, but further study is warranted.

Adverse drug events in intensive care units: a cross-sectional study of prevalence and risk factors

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug events are considered determinants of patient safety and quality of care.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the characteristics of adverse drug events in patients admitted to an intensive care unit and determine the impact of severity of illness and nursing workload on the prevalence of the events.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey based on retrospective analysis of a high-quality patient data management system for a university-based intensive care unit was used. The prevalence of adverse drug events was measured by using a validated global trigger tool adapted for the critical care environment. Severity was determined by using a validated algorithm. Disease severity and nursing workload were assessed by using validated scoring systems. An investigator blinded to the study and a panel of experts assessed putative serious adverse drug events for each drug taken. Characteristics of patients with and without adverse drug events were compared by using univariate and stepwise multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

During 175 of 1009 intensive care unit days screened, 230 adverse drug events occurred in 79 patients. The most common events were hypoglycemia, prolonged activated partial thromboplastin time, and hypokalemia. Of the adverse events, 96% were classified as causing temporary harm and 4% as causing complications. Both mean severity of disease and nursing workload were significantly higher on days when 1 or more adverse drug events occurred.

CONCLUSION

Adverse drug events were common in intensive care unit patients and were associated with illness severity and nursing workload.

Intensive insulin therapy in severe traumatic brain injury: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Intensive insulin therapy (IIT) has been shown to reduce morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients. Little investigation has been done to find out whether it improves the prognosis of patients with severe traumatic brain injury (STBI).

METHODS

We conducted a prospective controlled study where adult patients with blunt STBI, with Glasgow Coma Scale <or=8, admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) were randomly assigned to receive either IIT (maintenance of blood glucose between 80 mg/dL and 110 mg/dL with continuous insulin infusion) or conventional glycemic therapy (CGT) (maintenance of blood glucose below 180 mg/dL with subcutaneous insulin and insulin infusion only if blood glucose levels exceeded 220 mg/dL). The main outcome was Glasgow outcome scale 6 months after trauma. Secondary measures were hypoglycemia, incidence of infections, and days in ICU.

RESULTS

Of the 88 patients randomized, 42 were assigned to IIT and 46 to CGT. There was no difference (p = 0.63) in neurologic outcomes between the treatment groups: Glasgow outcome scale >3 was observed in 16 patients (41%) in the IIT and in 13 patients (32.5%) in the CGT group. More patients in the IIT group had hypoglycemia: 32 (82.1%), compared with 7 (17.5%) in the CGT group (p < 0.001). There were no differences in the number of days spent in the ICU (18.2 +/- 27.6 vs. 12.9 +/- 12.7) or in the sepsis rates (84.6% vs. 80%) between the groups.

CONCLUSION

In our study, IIT did not improve the neurologic outcome of patients with STBI but did increase the risk of hypoglycemia compared with CGT.

A review of perioperative glucose control in the neurosurgical population

Significant fluctuations in serum glucose levels accompany the stress response of surgery or acute injury and may be associated with vascular or neurologic morbidity. Maintenance of euglycemia with intensive insulin therapy (IIT) continues to be investigated as a therapeutic intervention to decrease morbidity associated with derangements in glucose metabolism. Hypoglycemia is a common side effect of IIT with potential for significant morbidity, especially in the neurologically injured patient. Differences in cerebral versus systemic glucose metabolism, the time course of cerebral response to injury, and heterogeneity of pathophysiology in neurosurgical patient populations are important to consider in evaluating the risks and benefits of IIT. While extremes of glucose levels are to be avoided, there are little data to support specific use of IIT for maintenance of euglycemia in the perioperative management of neurosurgical patients. Existing data are summarized and reviewed in this context.