Cargando…

Untangling glycaemia and mortality in critical care

BACKGROUND: Hyperglycaemia is associated with adverse outcomes in the intensive care unit, and initial studies suggested outcome benefits of glycaemic control (GC). However, subsequent studies often failed to replicate these results, and they were often unable to achieve consistent, safe control, ra...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Uyttendaele, Vincent, Dickson, Jennifer L., Shaw, Geoffrey M., Desaive, Thomas, Chase, J. Geoffrey
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5482947/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28645302
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1725-y
_version_ 1783245663143723008
author Uyttendaele, Vincent
Dickson, Jennifer L.
Shaw, Geoffrey M.
Desaive, Thomas
Chase, J. Geoffrey
author_facet Uyttendaele, Vincent
Dickson, Jennifer L.
Shaw, Geoffrey M.
Desaive, Thomas
Chase, J. Geoffrey
author_sort Uyttendaele, Vincent
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Hyperglycaemia is associated with adverse outcomes in the intensive care unit, and initial studies suggested outcome benefits of glycaemic control (GC). However, subsequent studies often failed to replicate these results, and they were often unable to achieve consistent, safe control, raising questions about the benefit or harm of GC as well as the nature of the association of glycaemia with mortality and clinical outcomes. In this study, we evaluated if non-survivors are harder to control than survivors and determined if glycaemic outcome is a function of patient condition and eventual outcome or of the glycaemic control provided. METHODS: Clinically validated, model-based, hour-to-hour insulin sensitivity (SI) and its hour-to-hour variability (%ΔSI) were identified over the first 72 h of therapy in 145 patients (119 survivors, 26 non-survivors). In hypothesis testing, we compared distributions of SI and %ΔSI in 6-hourly blocks for survivors and non-survivors. In equivalence testing, we assessed if differences in these distributions, based on blood glucose measurement error, were clinically significant. RESULTS: SI level was never equivalent between survivors and non-survivors (95% CI of percentage difference in medians outside ±12%). Non-survivors had higher SI, ranging from 9% to 47% higher overall in 6-h blocks, and this difference became statistically significant as glycaemic control progressed. %ΔSI was equivalent between survivors and non-survivors for all 6-hourly blocks (95% CI of difference in medians within ±12%) and decreased in general over time as glycaemic control progressed. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas non-survivors had higher SI levels, variability was equivalent to that of survivors over the first 72 h. These results indicate survivors and non-survivors are equally controllable, given an effective glycaemic control protocol, suggesting that glycaemia level and variability, and thus the association between glycaemia and outcome, are essentially determined by the control provided rather than by underlying patient or metabolic condition. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-017-1725-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5482947
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54829472017-06-26 Untangling glycaemia and mortality in critical care Uyttendaele, Vincent Dickson, Jennifer L. Shaw, Geoffrey M. Desaive, Thomas Chase, J. Geoffrey Crit Care Research BACKGROUND: Hyperglycaemia is associated with adverse outcomes in the intensive care unit, and initial studies suggested outcome benefits of glycaemic control (GC). However, subsequent studies often failed to replicate these results, and they were often unable to achieve consistent, safe control, raising questions about the benefit or harm of GC as well as the nature of the association of glycaemia with mortality and clinical outcomes. In this study, we evaluated if non-survivors are harder to control than survivors and determined if glycaemic outcome is a function of patient condition and eventual outcome or of the glycaemic control provided. METHODS: Clinically validated, model-based, hour-to-hour insulin sensitivity (SI) and its hour-to-hour variability (%ΔSI) were identified over the first 72 h of therapy in 145 patients (119 survivors, 26 non-survivors). In hypothesis testing, we compared distributions of SI and %ΔSI in 6-hourly blocks for survivors and non-survivors. In equivalence testing, we assessed if differences in these distributions, based on blood glucose measurement error, were clinically significant. RESULTS: SI level was never equivalent between survivors and non-survivors (95% CI of percentage difference in medians outside ±12%). Non-survivors had higher SI, ranging from 9% to 47% higher overall in 6-h blocks, and this difference became statistically significant as glycaemic control progressed. %ΔSI was equivalent between survivors and non-survivors for all 6-hourly blocks (95% CI of difference in medians within ±12%) and decreased in general over time as glycaemic control progressed. CONCLUSIONS: Whereas non-survivors had higher SI levels, variability was equivalent to that of survivors over the first 72 h. These results indicate survivors and non-survivors are equally controllable, given an effective glycaemic control protocol, suggesting that glycaemia level and variability, and thus the association between glycaemia and outcome, are essentially determined by the control provided rather than by underlying patient or metabolic condition. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13054-017-1725-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-06-24 /pmc/articles/PMC5482947/ /pubmed/28645302 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1725-y Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Uyttendaele, Vincent
Dickson, Jennifer L.
Shaw, Geoffrey M.
Desaive, Thomas
Chase, J. Geoffrey
Untangling glycaemia and mortality in critical care
title Untangling glycaemia and mortality in critical care
title_full Untangling glycaemia and mortality in critical care
title_fullStr Untangling glycaemia and mortality in critical care
title_full_unstemmed Untangling glycaemia and mortality in critical care
title_short Untangling glycaemia and mortality in critical care
title_sort untangling glycaemia and mortality in critical care
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5482947/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28645302
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1725-y
work_keys_str_mv AT uyttendaelevincent untanglingglycaemiaandmortalityincriticalcare
AT dicksonjenniferl untanglingglycaemiaandmortalityincriticalcare
AT shawgeoffreym untanglingglycaemiaandmortalityincriticalcare
AT desaivethomas untanglingglycaemiaandmortalityincriticalcare
AT chasejgeoffrey untanglingglycaemiaandmortalityincriticalcare