Glycemic control in acute illness

Rising concerns of Mucormycosis (Zygomycosis) among COVID-19 patients; an analysis and review based on case reports in literature

As the world continues to struggle with the pandemic of COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019), several cases of mucormycosis have been reported in these patients with a high mortality rate. We conducted a review of literature and found 19 articles with 20 patients who developed mucormycosis during their COVID-19 infection.14 (70%) were males, and 6(30%) were females. While their mean age was 52.2 ± 17.3 years, affected men were older than females. Ten (50%) patients also had diabetes. Common clinical findings included ophthalmologic complaints, fever, shortness of breath, and facial pain. Amphotericin B was the most common antifungal used and around 40% of cases needed surgical management of the infection. Steroid use was reported in around 12 cases (60%). Unfortunately, the mortality rate was 65% in this group of patients. Several changes in care should be brought for a consistent prevention, early diagnosis, and strong management of mucormycosis in COVID-19 patients.

Optimal Blood Glucose Monitoring Interval for Insulin Infusion in Critically Ill Non-Cardiothoracic Patients: A Pilot Study

Objective:

The American Diabetes Association and the Society of Critical Care Medicine recommend monitoring blood glucose (BG) every 1-2 hours in patients receiving insulin infusion to guide titration of insulin infusion to maintain serum glucose in the target range; however, this is based on weak evidence. We evaluated the compliance of hourly BG monitoring and relation of less frequent BG monitoring to glycemic status.

Materials and Methods:

Retrospective chart review performed on 56 consecutive adult patients who received intravenous insulin infusion for persistent hyperglycemia in the ICU at Saint Vincent Hospital, a tertiary care community hospital an urban setting in Northeast region of USA. The frequency of fingerstick blood glucose (FSBG) readings was reviewed for compliance with hourly FSBG monitoring per protocol and the impact of FSBG testing at different time intervals on the glycemic status. Depending on time interval of FSBG monitoring, the data was divided into three groups: Group A (<90 min), Group B (91-179 min) and Group C (≥180 min).

Results:

The mean age was 69 years (48% were males), 77% patients had preexisting type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The mean MPM II score was 41. Of the 1411 readings for BG monitoring on insulin infusion, 467 (33%) were in group A, 806 (57%) in group B and 138 (10%) in group C; hourly BG monitoring compliance was 12.6%. The overall glycemic status was similar among all groups. There were 14 (0.99%) hypoglycemic episodes observed. The rate of hypoglycemic episodes was similar in all three groups (p=0.55).

Conclusion:

In patients requiring insulin infusion for sustained hyperglycemia in ICU, the risk of hypoglycemic episodes was not significantly different with less frequent BG monitoring. The compliance to hourly blood glucose monitoring and ICU was variable, and hypoglycemic episodes were similar across the groups despite the variation in monitoring.

Significance of the Study:

The importance of glycemic control in ICU has been well established and it is a resource intensive venture. However, there are no major studies highlighting the most optimal time interval for blood glucose checks in critically ill patients on insulin infusion. With this study we hypothesize that time duration between blood glucose checks can be increased safely without any untoward effects. Our study provides evidence for effective resource management with reducing the time spent with every glucose check and directly translating into high value care.

Hyperglycemia in Medically Critically Ill Patients: Risk Factors and Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

We aimed to robustly categorize glycemic control in our medical intensive care unit (ICU) as either acceptable or suboptimal based on time-weighted daily blood glucose averages of <180 mg/dL or >180 mg/dL; identify clinical risk factors for suboptimal control; and compare clinical outcomes between the 2 glycemic control categories.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study in an academic tertiary and quaternary medical ICU.

RESULTS

Out of total of 974 unit stays over a 2-year period, 920 had complete data sets available for analysis. Of unit stays 63% (575) were classified as having acceptable glycemic control and the remaining 37% were classified (345) as having suboptimal glycemic control. Adjusting for covariables, the odds of suboptimal glycemic control were highest for patients with diabetes mellitus (odds ratio [OR] 5.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.72-6.93), corticosteroid use during the ICU stay (OR 4.50, 95% CI 3.21-6.32), and catecholamine infusions (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.04-1.93). Adjusting for acuity, acceptable glycemic control was associated with decreased odds of hospital mortality but not ICU mortality (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48-0.88 and OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.55-1.17, respectively). Suboptimal glycemic control was associated with increased odds of longer-than-predicted ICU and hospital stays (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.30-2.38 and OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.12-2.01, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In our high-acuity medically critically ill patient population, achieving time-weighted average daily blood glucose levels <180 mg/dL reliably while in the ICU significantly decreased the odds of subsequent hospital mortality. Suboptimal glycemic control during the ICU stay, on the other hand, significantly increased the odds of longer-than-predicted ICU and hospital stay.

Guida pratica alla prevenzione e gestione dell’infezione da COVID-19 nelle persone con diabete

La pandemia di COVID-19 rappresenta un’enorme sfida per il sistema sanitario nazionale. Sulla base dei dati ad oggi disponibili è emerso che le persone con diabete mellito presentano un maggior rischio di complicanze e morte per COVID-19. Pertanto, adottare misure preventive di igiene e di distanziamento sociale è cruciale, a maggior ragione in questa categoria di soggetti. A sostegno dei pazienti con diabete sono state intraprese molteplici iniziative al fine di garantire la continuità assistenziale, tra cui la proroga della validità dei piani terapeutici per i farmaci ipoglicemizzanti, le procedure per il rinnovo della patente di guida e l’attivazione di servizi di telemedicina. In caso di infezione da COVID-19 e sintomi lievi è possibile una gestione domiciliare della persona con diabete, raccomandando un attento monitoraggio glicemico. Il paziente diabetico che necessita di ospedalizzazione richiede una gestione multidisciplinare che includa il diabetologo, con l’obiettivo di mantenere un adeguato controllo glicemico in assenza di ipoglicemie. Le persone con diabete rappresentano un gruppo vulnerabile per il quale devono essere poste in atto strategie specifiche sia in termini di prevenzione che di trattamento.

High Glucose Variability Increases 30-Day Readmission Rates in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Hospitalized in Department of Surgery

Glucose variability is common among hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM). I investigated to assess the variability of glucose in patients with type 2 DM accounts for in-hospital readmission rates in department of Surgery. I retrospectively analyzed 206 patients with type 2 DM, who was admitted to our hospital for surgical interventions and re-admitted within 30 days after discharge. I also enrolled 610 age, sex and diabetic duration matched patients with type 2 DM, as control. Outcomes measure included average and standard deviation (SD) of blood glucose during admission, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), lipid profile, renal function, length of stay (LOS). Patients who had re-admission within 30 days after discharge had higher SD of blood glucose levels than control (84.7 ± 53.5 mg/dL vs. 46.2 ± 42.8 mg/dL, p < 0.001) but not average of blood glucose levels. Comparing to control group, the study group also had higher HbA1c (8.4 ± 1.3% vs. 7.7 ± 1.1%, p = 0.015) and LOS (8.5 ± 2.5 days vs 7.0 ± 1.5 days, p = 0.020). The independent predictors of 30-day readmission rates were SD of blood glucose during admission and HbA1c (hazard ratio: 1.680, 1.493; p value < 0.001, 0.008, respectively). Decreasing glucose variability during admission for surgery is important for patients with type 2 DM to decreasing re-admission rates and LOS. HBA1c may also identify patients at higher risk of postoperative complications and possibility of re-admission.

Glycated hemoglobin A1c level on the day of emergency surgery is a marker of premorbid glycemic control: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Current international guideline recommends to maintain blood glucose level ≤ 180 mg/dL in acute ill patients, irrespective of presence of premorbid diabetes. However, there are studies suggested that optimal acute glycemic control should be adjusted according to premorbid glycemic control in patients with chronic hyperglycemia. Accordingly, to obtain the information of premorbid glycemic control would be relevant. However, the HbA1c level on the day of the emergency operation (HbA1c-ope) might not be useful as a surrogate of premorbid chronic glycemic control, since glucose metabolism can be affected by inflammation, severity of illness and surgical invasion.

METHODS

We hypothesized that HbA1c-ope reflects pre-morbid glycemic control. To assess this hypothesis, we conducted a single-center retrospective observational study to assess the association between HbA1c-ope and HbA1c level measured within 30 days before the operation (HbA1c-pre). We screened patients who had been admitted to the ICU of our hospital after emergency surgery during the period from January 2008 to December 2016. Patients in whom both of HbA1c-ope and HbA1c-pre were measured were included in this study. We compared HbA1c-ope and HbA1c-pre using the paired t-test. The correlation between the two HbA1c measurements was assessed using Pearson's correlation coefficient. Its agreement was assessed using the Bland-Altman approach with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

We included 48 patients in this study. The mean value of HbA1c-pre was 6.3%, which was not significantly different from the mean value of 6.2% for HbA1c-ope (p = 0.12). There was a significant correlation between HbA1c-pre and HbA1c-ope (r2 = 0.70, p < 0.001). The mean difference between two HbA1c measurements was 0.12% (95% CI: -0.03% to 0.27%). The limit of agreement ranged from - 0.9% to +1.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that there was a significant correlation between HbA1c-ope and HbA1c-pre. Our findings suggest that HbA1c-ope can be used to estimate previous glycemic control with an acceptable degree of accuracy, enabling personalized glycemic control in the perioperative period.

Portland Intensive Insulin Therapy During Living Donor Liver Transplantation: Association with Postreperfusion Hyperglycemia and Clinical Outcomes

Many liver transplant recipients experience intraoperative hyperglycemia after graft reperfusion. Accordingly, we introduced the Portland intensive insulin therapy (PoIIT) in our practice to better control blood glucose concentration (BGC). We evaluated the effects of PoIIT by comparing with our conventional insulin therapy (CoIT). Of 128 patients who underwent living donor liver transplantation (LDLT) during the phaseout period of CoIT, 89 were treated with the PoIIT and 39 were treated with CoIT. The primary outcome was hyperglycemia (BGC > 180 mg/dL) during the intraoperative postreperfusion phase. The secondary outcomes were postoperative complications such as infection. The incidence of hyperglycemia (22.5% vs. 53.8%, p = 0.001) and prolonged hyperglycemia for >2 hours (7.9% vs. 30.8%, p = 0.002) was significantly lower in PoIIT group than in CoIT group. A mixed linear model further demonstrated that repeatedly measured BGCs were lower in PoIIT group (p < 0.001). The use of PoIIT was significantly associated with decreases in major infections (OR = 0.23 [0.06-0.85], p = 0.028), prolonged mechanical ventilation (OR = 0.29 [0.09-0.89], p = 0.031), and biliary stricture (OR = 0.23 [0.07-0.78], p = 0.018) after adjustments for age, sex, and diabetes mellitus. In conclusion, the PoIIT is effective for maintaining BGC and preventing hyperglycemia during the intraoperative postreperfusion phase of living donor liver transplantation with potential clinical benefits.