Cargando…
Glycaemic control targets after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Optimal glycaemic targets in traumatic brain injury (TBI) remain unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intensive with conventional glycaemic control in TBI requiring admission to an intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS:...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5775599/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29351760 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1883-y |
_version_ | 1783293944264654848 |
---|---|
author | Hermanides, Jeroen Plummer, Mark P. Finnis, Mark Deane, Adam M. Coles, Jonathan P. Menon, David K. |
author_facet | Hermanides, Jeroen Plummer, Mark P. Finnis, Mark Deane, Adam M. Coles, Jonathan P. Menon, David K. |
author_sort | Hermanides, Jeroen |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Optimal glycaemic targets in traumatic brain injury (TBI) remain unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intensive with conventional glycaemic control in TBI requiring admission to an intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to November 2016. Outcomes of interest included ICU and in-hospital mortality, poor neurological outcome, the incidence of hypoglycaemia and infective complications. Data were analysed by pairwise random effects models with secondary analysis of differing levels of conventional glycaemic control. RESULTS: Ten RCTs, involving 1066 TBI patients were included. Three studies were conducted exclusively in a TBI population, whereas in seven trials, the TBI population was a sub-cohort of a mixed neurocritical or general ICU population. Glycaemic targets with intensive control ranged from 4.4 to 6.7 mmol/L, while conventional targets aimed to keep glucose levels below thresholds of 8.4–12 mmol/L. Conventional versus intensive control showed no association with ICU or hospital mortality (relative risk (RR) (95% CI) 0.93 (0.68–1.27), P = 0.64 and 1.07 (0.84–1.36), P = 0.62, respectively). The risk of a poor neurological outcome was higher with conventional control (RR (95% CI) = 1.10 (1.001–1.24), P = 0.047). However, severe hypoglycaemia occurred less frequently with conventional control (RR (95% CI) = 0.22 (0.09–0.52), P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis of intensive glycaemic control shows no association with reduced mortality in TBI. Intensive glucose control showed a borderline significant reduction in the risk of poor neurological outcome, but markedly increased the risk of hypoglycaemia. These contradictory findings should motivate further research. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-017-1883-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5775599 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57755992018-01-31 Glycaemic control targets after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis Hermanides, Jeroen Plummer, Mark P. Finnis, Mark Deane, Adam M. Coles, Jonathan P. Menon, David K. Crit Care Research BACKGROUND: Optimal glycaemic targets in traumatic brain injury (TBI) remain unclear. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing intensive with conventional glycaemic control in TBI requiring admission to an intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials to November 2016. Outcomes of interest included ICU and in-hospital mortality, poor neurological outcome, the incidence of hypoglycaemia and infective complications. Data were analysed by pairwise random effects models with secondary analysis of differing levels of conventional glycaemic control. RESULTS: Ten RCTs, involving 1066 TBI patients were included. Three studies were conducted exclusively in a TBI population, whereas in seven trials, the TBI population was a sub-cohort of a mixed neurocritical or general ICU population. Glycaemic targets with intensive control ranged from 4.4 to 6.7 mmol/L, while conventional targets aimed to keep glucose levels below thresholds of 8.4–12 mmol/L. Conventional versus intensive control showed no association with ICU or hospital mortality (relative risk (RR) (95% CI) 0.93 (0.68–1.27), P = 0.64 and 1.07 (0.84–1.36), P = 0.62, respectively). The risk of a poor neurological outcome was higher with conventional control (RR (95% CI) = 1.10 (1.001–1.24), P = 0.047). However, severe hypoglycaemia occurred less frequently with conventional control (RR (95% CI) = 0.22 (0.09–0.52), P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis of intensive glycaemic control shows no association with reduced mortality in TBI. Intensive glucose control showed a borderline significant reduction in the risk of poor neurological outcome, but markedly increased the risk of hypoglycaemia. These contradictory findings should motivate further research. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-017-1883-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-01-19 /pmc/articles/PMC5775599/ /pubmed/29351760 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1883-y Text en © The Author(s). 2018 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 Hermanides, Jeroen Plummer, Mark P. Finnis, Mark Deane, Adam M. Coles, Jonathan P. Menon, David K. Glycaemic control targets after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Glycaemic control targets after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Glycaemic control targets after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Glycaemic control targets after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Glycaemic control targets after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Glycaemic control targets after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | glycaemic control targets after traumatic brain injury: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5775599/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29351760 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13054-017-1883-y |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hermanidesjeroen glycaemiccontroltargetsaftertraumaticbraininjuryasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT plummermarkp glycaemiccontroltargetsaftertraumaticbraininjuryasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT finnismark glycaemiccontroltargetsaftertraumaticbraininjuryasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT deaneadamm glycaemiccontroltargetsaftertraumaticbraininjuryasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT colesjonathanp glycaemiccontroltargetsaftertraumaticbraininjuryasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT menondavidk glycaemiccontroltargetsaftertraumaticbraininjuryasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |