Dataset Information

Organ failure and tight glycemic control in the SPRINT study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Intensive care unit mortality is strongly associated with organ failure rate and severity. The sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score is used to evaluate the impact of a successful tight glycemic control (TGC) intervention (SPRINT) on organ failure, morbidity, and thus mortality.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 371 patients (3,356 days) on SPRINT (August 2005 - April 2007) and 413 retrospective patients (3,211 days) from two years prior, matched by Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) III. SOFA is calculated daily for each patient. The effect of the SPRINT TGC intervention is assessed by comparing the percentage of patients with SOFA ?5 each day and its trends over time and cohort/group. Organ-failure free days (all SOFA components ?2) and number of organ failures (SOFA components >2) are also compared. Cumulative time in 4.0 to 7.0 mmol/L band (cTIB) was evaluated daily to link tightness and consistency of TGC (cTIB ?0.5) to SOFA ?5 using conditional and joint probabilities.

Results

Admission and maximum SOFA scores were similar (P = 0.20; P = 0.76), with similar time to maximum (median: one day; IQR: 13 days; P = 0.99). Median length of stay was similar (4.1 days SPRINT and 3.8 days Pre-SPRINT; P = 0.94). The percentage of patients with SOFA ?5 is different over the first 14 days (P = 0.016), rising to approximately 75% for Pre-SPRINT and approximately 85% for SPRINT, with clear separation after two days. Organ-failure-free days were different (SPRINT = 41.6%; Pre-SPRINT = 36.5%; P < 0.0001) as were the percent of total possible organ failures (SPRINT = 16.0%; Pre-SPRINT = 19.0%; P < 0.0001). By Day 3 over 90% of SPRINT patients had cTIB ?0.5 (37% Pre-SPRINT) reaching 100% by Day 7 (50% Pre-SPRINT). Conditional and joint probabilities indicate tighter, more consistent TGC under SPRINT (cTIB ?0.5) increased the likelihood SOFA ?5.

Conclusions

SPRINT TGC resolved organ failure faster, and for more patients, from similar admission and maximum SOFA scores, than conventional control. These reductions mirror the reduced mortality with SPRINT. The cTIB ?0.5 metric provides a first benchmark linking TGC quality to organ failure. These results support other physiological and clinical results indicating the role tight, consistent TGC can play in reducing organ failure, morbidity and mortality, and should be validated on data from randomised trials.

SUBMITTER: Chase JG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2945138 | biostudies-literature | 2010

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Organ failure and tight glycemic control in the SPRINT study.

Chase J Geoffrey JG Pretty Christopher G CG Pfeifer Leesa L Shaw Geoffrey M GM Preiser Jean-Charles JC Le Compte Aaron J AJ Lin Jessica J Hewett Darren D Moorhead Katherine T KT Desaive Thomas T

Critical care (London, England) 20100812 4

<h4>Introduction</h4>Intensive care unit mortality is strongly associated with organ failure rate and severity. The sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score is used to evaluate the impact of a successful tight glycemic control (TGC) intervention (SPRINT) on organ failure, morbidity, and thus mortality.<h4>Methods</h4>A retrospective analysis of 371 patients (3,356 days) on SPRINT (August 2005 - April 2007) and 413 retrospective patients (3,211 days) from two years prior, matched by Acute ...[more]

PMID: 20704712

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn multicenter studies, tight glycemic control targeting a normal blood glucose level has not been shown to improve outcomes in critically ill adults or children after cardiac surgery. Studies involving critically ill children who have not undergone cardiac surgery are lacking.MethodsIn a 35-center trial, we randomly assigned critically ill children with confirmed hyperglycemia (excluding patients who had undergone cardiac surgery) to one of two ranges of glycemic control: 80 to 110 mg per deciliter (4.4 to 6.1 mmol per liter; lower-target group) or 150 to 180 mg per deciliter (8.3 to 10.0 mmol per liter; higher-target group). Clinicians were guided by continuous glucose monitoring and explicit methods for insulin adjustment. The primary outcome was the number of intensive care unit (ICU)-free days to day 28.ResultsThe trial was stopped early, on the recommendation of the data and safety monitoring board, owing to a low likelihood of benefit and evidence of the possibility of harm. Of 713 patients, 360 were randomly assigned to the lower-target group and 353 to the higher-target group. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the median number of ICU-free days did not differ significantly between the lower-target group and the higher-target group (19.4 days [interquartile range {IQR}, 0 to 24.2] and 19.4 days [IQR, 6.7 to 23.9], respectively; P=0.58). In per-protocol analyses, the median time-weighted average glucose level was significantly lower in the lower-target group (109 mg per deciliter [IQR, 102 to 118]; 6.1 mmol per liter [IQR, 5.7 to 6.6]) than in the higher-target group (123 mg per deciliter [IQR, 108 to 142]; 6.8 mmol per liter [IQR, 6.0 to 7.9]; P<0.001). Patients in the lower-target group also had higher rates of health care-associated infections than those in the higher-target group (12 of 349 patients [3.4%] vs. 4 of 349 [1.1%], P=0.04), as well as higher rates of severe hypoglycemia, defined as a blood glucose level below 40 mg per deciliter (2.2 mmol per liter) (18 patients [5.2%] vs. 7 [2.0%], P=0.03). No significant differences were observed in mortality, severity of organ dysfunction, or the number of ventilator-free days.ConclusionsCritically ill children with hyperglycemia did not benefit from tight glycemic control targeted to a blood glucose level of 80 to 110 mg per deciliter, as compared with a level of 150 to 180 mg per deciliter. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; HALF-PINT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01565941 .).

Project description:In some studies, tight glycemic control with insulin improved outcomes in adults undergoing cardiac surgery, but these benefits are unproven in critically ill children at risk for hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia. We tested the hypothesis that tight glycemic control reduces morbidity after pediatric cardiac surgery.In this two-center, prospective, randomized trial, we enrolled 980 children, 0 to 36 months of age, undergoing surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. Patients were randomly assigned to either tight glycemic control (with the use of an insulin-dosing algorithm targeting a blood glucose level of 80 to 110 mg per deciliter [4.4 to 6.1 mmol per liter]) or standard care in the cardiac intensive care unit (ICU). Continuous glucose monitoring was used to guide the frequency of blood glucose measurement and to detect impending hypoglycemia. The primary outcome was the rate of health care-associated infections in the cardiac ICU. Secondary outcomes included mortality, length of stay, organ failure, and hypoglycemia.A total of 444 of the 490 children assigned to tight glycemic control (91%) received insulin versus 9 of 490 children assigned to standard care (2%). Although normoglycemia was achieved earlier with tight glycemic control than with standard care (6 hours vs. 16 hours, P<0.001) and was maintained for a greater proportion of the critical illness period (50% vs. 33%, P<0.001), tight glycemic control was not associated with a significantly decreased rate of health care-associated infections (8.6 vs. 9.9 per 1000 patient-days, P=0.67). Secondary outcomes did not differ significantly between groups, and tight glycemic control did not benefit high-risk subgroups. Only 3% of the patients assigned to tight glycemic control had severe hypoglycemia (blood glucose <40 mg per deciliter [2.2 mmol per liter]).Tight glycemic control can be achieved with a low hypoglycemia rate after cardiac surgery in children, but it does not significantly change the infection rate, mortality, length of stay, or measures of organ failure, as compared with standard care. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; SPECS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00443599.).

Project description:ImportanceIn older adults with multiple serious comorbidities and functional limitations, the harms of intensive glycemic control likely exceed the benefits.ObjectivesTo examine glycemic control levels among older adults with diabetes mellitus by health status and to estimate the prevalence of potential overtreatment of diabetes.Design, setting, and participantsCross-sectional analysis of the data on 1288 older adults (≥65 years) with diabetes from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2001 through 2010 who had a hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measurement. All analyses incorporated complex survey design to produce nationally representative estimates.ExposuresHealth status categories: very complex/poor, based on difficulty with 2 or more activities of daily living or dialysis dependence; complex/intermediate, based on difficulty with 2 or more instrumental activities of daily living or presence of 3 or more chronic conditions; and relatively healthy if none of these were present.Main outcomes and measuresTight glycemic control (HbA1c level, <7%) and use of diabetes medications likely to result in hypoglycemia (insulin or sulfonylureas).ResultsOf 1288 older adults with diabetes, 50.7% (95% CI, 46.6%-54.8%), representing 3.1 million (95% CI, 2.7-3.5), were relatively healthy, 28.1% (95% CI, 24.8%-31.5%), representing 1.7 million (95% CI, 1.4-2.0), had complex/intermediate health, and 21.2% (95% CI, 18.3%-24.4%), representing 1.3 million (95% CI, 1.1-1.5), had very complex/poor health. Overall, 61.5% (95% CI, 57.5%-65.3%), representing 3.8 million (95% CI, 3.4-4.2), had an HbA1c level of less than 7%; this proportion did not differ across health status categories (62.8% [95% CI, 56.9%-68.3%]) were relatively healthy, 63.0% (95% CI, 57.0%-68.6%) had complex/intermediate health, and 56.4% (95% CI, 49.7%-62.9%) had very complex/poor health (P = .26). Of the older adults with an HbA1c level of less than 7%, 54.9% (95% CI, 50.4%-59.3%) were treated with either insulin or sulfonylureas; this proportion was similar across health status categories (50.8% [95% CI, 45.1%-56.5%] were relatively healthy, 58.7% [95% CI, 49.4%-67.5%] had complex/intermediate health, and 60.0% [95% CI, 51.4%-68.1%] had very complex/poor health; P = .14). During the 10 study years, there were no significant changes in the proportion of older adults with an HbA1c level of less than 7% (P = .34), the proportion with an HbA1c level of less than 7% who had complex/intermediate or very complex/poor health (P = .27), or the proportion with an HbA1c level of less than 7% who were treated with insulin or sulfonylureas despite having complex/intermediate or very complex/poor health (P = .65).Conclusions and relevanceAlthough the harms of intensive treatment likely exceed the benefits for older patients with complex/intermediate or very complex/poor health status, most of these adults reached tight glycemic targets between 2001 and 2010. Most of them were treated with insulin or sulfonylureas, which may lead to severe hypoglycemia. Our findings suggest that a substantial proportion of older adults with diabetes were potentially overtreated.

Project description:Tight glycemic control can potentially reduce morbidity and mortality in the intensive care unit but increases the risk of hypoglycemia. The most effective means to avoid hypoglycemia is to obtain frequent blood glucose samples, but this increases the burden to nursing staff. The objective of this study was to assess the ability of a real-time continuous glucose monitor to reduce hypoglycemia (blood glucose <60 mg/dL [3.3 mmol/L]) during standard care or tight glycemic control effected with a proportional integral derivative insulin titration algorithm.Real-time continuous glucose monitor profiles obtained from an ongoing prospective randomized trial of tight glycemic control were retrospectively analyzed to determine whether the continuous glucose measure had prevented instances of hypoglycemia.Cardiac intensive care unit.Children 3 yrs of age or younger undergoing cardiac surgery were studied.Intravenous insulin infusion and rescue glucose guided by the real-time continuous glucose monitor and the proportional integral derivative algorithm in the tight glycemic control arm (n = 155; target glucose 80-110 mg/dL [4.4-6.1 mmol/L]) and the real-time continuous glucose monitor in the standard care arm (n = 156).No reduction in hypoglycemia was observed with real-time continuous glucose monitor alarms set at 60 mg/dL (3.3 mmol/L) (zero of 19 occurrences of blood glucose <60 mg/dL [3.3 mmol/L] detected); 18 of 40 subsequent incidences of hypoglycemia were detected after the alarm threshold was increased to 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L). In the tight glycemic control arm, eight incidences were reduced in duration and an additional eight events were prevented with intravenous glucose. In the standard care arm, three of nine occurrences of hypoglycemia were detected with the duration reduced in all cases. On average, one to two false hypoglycemia alarms were observed in each patient.The real-time continuous glucose monitor in combination with proportional integral derivative control can reduce hypoglycemia during tight glycemic control. The real-time continuous glucose monitor can also reduce hypoglycemia during standard care. However, false alarms increase the overall nursing workload.

Project description:BackgroundCritically ill patients often present increased insulin resistance and stress-induced hyperglycemia. Tight glycemic control aims to reduce blood glucose (BG) levels and variability while ensuring safety from hypoglycemia. This paper presents the results of the second Belgian clinical trial using the customizable STAR framework in a target-to-range control approach. The main objective is reducing measurement frequency while maintaining performance and safety of the glycemic control.MethodsThe STAR-Liege 2 (SL2) protocol targeted the 100-140 mg/dL glycemic band and offered 2-hourly and 3-hourly interventions. Only insulin rates were adjusted, and nutrition inputs were left to the attending clinicians. This protocol restricted the forecasted risk of BG?<?90 mg/dL to a 5% level using a stochastic model of insulin sensitivity to assess patient-specific responses to insulin and its future likely variability to optimize insulin interventions. The clinical trial was performed at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liege and included 9 patients. Results are compared to 24-hour pre-trial and 24-hour post-trial, but also to the results of the first pilot trial performed in Liege, STAR-Liege 1 (SL1). This trial was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty of the University of Liege (Liege, Belgium).ResultsDuring the SL2 trial, 91 measurements were taken over 194 hours. BG levels were tightly distributed: 54.9% of BG within 100-140 mg/dL, 40.7% were???140 mg/dL and 4.4% were?<?100 mg/dL with no BG?<?70 mg/dL. Comparing these results with 24-hour pre-trial and post-trial shows that SL2 reduced high and low BG levels and reduced glycemic variability. Nurses selected 3-hourly measurement only 5 of 16 times and overrode 12% of 91 recommended interventions (35% increased insulin rates and 65% decreased insulin rates). SL1 and SL2 present similar BG levels distribution (p?>?0.05) with significantly reduced measurement frequency for SL2 (p?<?0.05).ConclusionsThe SL2 protocol succeeded in reducing clinical workload while maintaining safety and effectiveness of the glycemic control. SL2 was also shown to be safer and tighter than hospital control. Overall results validate the efficacy of significantly customizing the STAR framework.

Project description:BackgroundThe benefit results of postoperative tight glycemic control (TGC) were controversial and there was a lack of well-powered studies that support current guideline recommendations.MethodsThe EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched utilizing the key words "Blood Glucose", "insulin" and "Postoperative Period" to retrieve all randomized controlled trials evaluating the benefits of postoperative TGC as compared to conventional glycemic control (CGC) in patients undergoing surgery.ResultsFifteen studies involving 5053 patients were identified. As compared to CGC group, there were lower risks of total postoperative infection (9.4% vs. 15.8%; RR 0.586, 95% CI 0.504 to 0.680, p < 0.001) and wound infection (4.6% vs. 7.2%; RR 0.620, 95% CI 0.422 to 0.910, p = 0.015) in TGC group. TGC also showed a lower risk of postoperative short-term mortality (3.8% vs. 5.4%; RR 0.692, 95% CI 0.527 to 0.909, p = 0.008), but sensitivity analyses showed that the result was mainly influenced by one study. The patients in the TGC group experienced a significant higher rate of postoperative hypoglycemia (22.3% vs. 11.0%; RR 3.145, 95% CI 1.928 to 5.131, p < 0.001) and severe hypoglycemia (2.8% vs. 0.7%; RR 3.821, 95% CI 1.796 to 8.127, p < 0.001) as compared to CGC group. TGC showed less length of ICU stay (SMD, - 0.428 days; 95% CI, - 0.833 to - 0.022 days; p = 0.039). However, TGC showed a neutral effect on neurological dysfunction (1.1% vs. 2.4%; RR 0.499, 95% CI 0.219 to 1.137, p = 0.098), acute renal failure (3.3% vs. 5.4%, RR 0.610, 95% CI 0.359 to 1.038, p = 0.068), duration of mechanical ventilation (p = 0.201) and length of hospitalization (p = 0.082).ConclusionsTGC immediately after surgery significantly reduces total postoperative infection rates and short-term mortality. However, it might limit conclusion regarding the efficacy of TGC for short-term mortality in sensitivity analyses. The patients in the TGC group experienced a significant higher rate of postoperative hypoglycemia. This study may suggest that TGC should be administrated under close glucose monitoring in patients undergoing surgery, especially in those with high postoperative infection risk.

Dataset Information

Organ failure and tight glycemic control in the SPRINT study.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Organ failure and tight glycemic control in the SPRINT study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets