Cargando…
Is intensive glucose control bad for critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis
Background: The monitoring and management of blood glucose concentration are standard practices in critical settings as hyperglycaemia has been shown close association with poorer outcomes. Several meta-analyses have revealed that intensive glucose control has no benefit in decreasing short-term mor...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Ivyspring International Publisher
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7097913/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32226310 http://dx.doi.org/10.7150/ijbs.43447 |
_version_ | 1783511075902193664 |
---|---|
author | Yao, Ren-qi Ren, Chao Wu, Guo-sheng Zhu, Yi-bing Xia, Zhao-fan Yao, Yong-ming |
author_facet | Yao, Ren-qi Ren, Chao Wu, Guo-sheng Zhu, Yi-bing Xia, Zhao-fan Yao, Yong-ming |
author_sort | Yao, Ren-qi |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: The monitoring and management of blood glucose concentration are standard practices in critical settings as hyperglycaemia has been shown close association with poorer outcomes. Several meta-analyses have revealed that intensive glucose control has no benefit in decreasing short-term mortality among critically ill patients, while the studies these meta-analyses have incorporated have been largely divergent. We aim to perform a more comprehensive meta-analysis addressing this problem to provide stronger evidence. Methods: We conducted comprehensive searches for relevant randomized controlled studies in online databases, including the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed databases, up to September 1, 2018. The clinical data, which included all-cause mortality, severe hypoglycemia, need for RRT, infection resulting in sepsis, ICU mortality, 90-day mortality, 180-day mortality, and hospital and ICU lengths of stay, were screened and analyzed after data extraction. We applied odds ratios (ORs) to analyze dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes with a random effects model. Results: A total of 57 RCTs involving a total of 21840 patients were finally included. Patients admitted to the ICU who underwent intensive glucose control showed significantly reduced all-cause mortality (OR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.80-1.00; P=0.04; I(2)=32%), reduced infection rate (OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.51-0.82, P=0.0002; I(2)=47%), a lower occurrence of acquired sepsis (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.99, P=0.04; I(2)=0%) and shortened length of ICU stay (MD: -0.70, 95% CI: -1.21--0.19, P=0.007, I(2)=70%) when compared to the same parameters as those treated with the usual care strategy. However, patients in the intensive glucose control group presented with a significantly higher risk of severe hypoglycemia (OR: 5.63, 95% CI: 4.02-7.87, P<0.00001; I(2)=67%). Conclusions: Critically ill patients undergoing intensive glucose control showed significantly reduced all-cause mortality, length of ICU stay and incidence of acquired infection and sepsis compared to the same parameters in patients treated with the usual care strategy, while the intensive glucose control strategy was associated with higher occurrence of severe hypoglycemic events. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7097913 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Ivyspring International Publisher |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-70979132020-03-28 Is intensive glucose control bad for critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis Yao, Ren-qi Ren, Chao Wu, Guo-sheng Zhu, Yi-bing Xia, Zhao-fan Yao, Yong-ming Int J Biol Sci Research Paper Background: The monitoring and management of blood glucose concentration are standard practices in critical settings as hyperglycaemia has been shown close association with poorer outcomes. Several meta-analyses have revealed that intensive glucose control has no benefit in decreasing short-term mortality among critically ill patients, while the studies these meta-analyses have incorporated have been largely divergent. We aim to perform a more comprehensive meta-analysis addressing this problem to provide stronger evidence. Methods: We conducted comprehensive searches for relevant randomized controlled studies in online databases, including the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PubMed databases, up to September 1, 2018. The clinical data, which included all-cause mortality, severe hypoglycemia, need for RRT, infection resulting in sepsis, ICU mortality, 90-day mortality, 180-day mortality, and hospital and ICU lengths of stay, were screened and analyzed after data extraction. We applied odds ratios (ORs) to analyze dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes with a random effects model. Results: A total of 57 RCTs involving a total of 21840 patients were finally included. Patients admitted to the ICU who underwent intensive glucose control showed significantly reduced all-cause mortality (OR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.80-1.00; P=0.04; I(2)=32%), reduced infection rate (OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.51-0.82, P=0.0002; I(2)=47%), a lower occurrence of acquired sepsis (OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.99, P=0.04; I(2)=0%) and shortened length of ICU stay (MD: -0.70, 95% CI: -1.21--0.19, P=0.007, I(2)=70%) when compared to the same parameters as those treated with the usual care strategy. However, patients in the intensive glucose control group presented with a significantly higher risk of severe hypoglycemia (OR: 5.63, 95% CI: 4.02-7.87, P<0.00001; I(2)=67%). Conclusions: Critically ill patients undergoing intensive glucose control showed significantly reduced all-cause mortality, length of ICU stay and incidence of acquired infection and sepsis compared to the same parameters in patients treated with the usual care strategy, while the intensive glucose control strategy was associated with higher occurrence of severe hypoglycemic events. Ivyspring International Publisher 2020-03-12 /pmc/articles/PMC7097913/ /pubmed/32226310 http://dx.doi.org/10.7150/ijbs.43447 Text en © The author(s) This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). See http://ivyspring.com/terms for full terms and conditions. |
spellingShingle | Research Paper Yao, Ren-qi Ren, Chao Wu, Guo-sheng Zhu, Yi-bing Xia, Zhao-fan Yao, Yong-ming Is intensive glucose control bad for critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Is intensive glucose control bad for critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Is intensive glucose control bad for critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Is intensive glucose control bad for critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Is intensive glucose control bad for critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Is intensive glucose control bad for critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | is intensive glucose control bad for critically ill patients? a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Research Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7097913/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32226310 http://dx.doi.org/10.7150/ijbs.43447 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yaorenqi isintensiveglucosecontrolbadforcriticallyillpatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT renchao isintensiveglucosecontrolbadforcriticallyillpatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT wuguosheng isintensiveglucosecontrolbadforcriticallyillpatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT zhuyibing isintensiveglucosecontrolbadforcriticallyillpatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT xiazhaofan isintensiveglucosecontrolbadforcriticallyillpatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT yaoyongming isintensiveglucosecontrolbadforcriticallyillpatientsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |