Continuous glucose monitoring for the prevention of morbidity and mortality in preterm infants.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Galderisi A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8092644 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Continuous glucose monitoring for the prevention of morbidity and mortality in preterm infants.
Galderisi Alfonso A Bruschettini Matteo M Russo Chiara C Hall Rebecka R Trevisanuto Daniele D
The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 20201221
<h4>Background</h4>Preterm infants are susceptible to hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, conditions which may lead to adverse neurodevelopment. The use of continuous glucose monitoring devices (CGM) might help keeping glucose levels in the normal range, and reduce the need for blood sampling. However, the use of CGM might be associated with harms in the preterm infant.<h4>Objectives</h4>Objective one: to assess the benefits and harms of CGM alone versus standard method of glycemic measure in preter ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundPreterm infants are susceptible to hyperglycaemia and hypoglycaemia, which may lead to adverse neurodevelopment. The use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) devices might help in keeping glucose levels in the normal range, and reduce the need for blood sampling. However, the use of CGM might be associated with harms in the preterm infant.ObjectivesTo assess the benefits and harms of CGM versus intermittent modalities to measure glycaemia in preterm infants 1. at risk of hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia; 2. with proven hypoglycaemia; or 3. with proven hyperglycaemia.Search methodsWe searched CENTRAL (2021, Issue 4); PubMed; Embase; and CINAHL in April 2021. We also searched clinical trials databases, conference proceedings, and reference lists of retrieved articles for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs.Selection criteriaWe included RCTs and quasi-RCTs comparing the use of CGM versus intermittent modalities to measure glycaemia in preterm infants at risk of hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia; with proven hypoglycaemia; or with proven hyperglycaemia.Data collection and analysisWe assessed the methodological quality of included trials using Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group (EPOC) criteria (assessing randomization, blinding, loss to follow-up, and handling of outcome data). We evaluated treatment effects using a fixed-effect model with risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for categorical data and mean, standard deviation (SD), and mean difference (MD) for continuous data. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.Main resultsWe included four trials enrolling 300 infants in our updated review. We included one new study and excluded another previously included study (because the inclusion criteria of the review have been narrowed). We compared the use of CGM to intermittent modalities in preterm infants at risk of hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia; however, one of these trials was analyzed separately because CGM was used as a standalone device, without being coupled to a control algorithm as in the other trials. We identified no studies in preterm infants with proven hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia. None of the four included trials reported the neurodevelopmental outcome (i.e. the primary outcome of this review), or seizures. The effect of the use of CGM on mortality during hospitalization is uncertain (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.16 to 2.13; RD -0.02, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.03; 230 participants; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence). The certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcomes because of limitations in study design, and imprecision of estimates. One study is ongoing (estimated sample size 60 infants) and planned to be completed in 2022.Authors' conclusionsThere is insufficient evidence to determine if CGM affects preterm infant mortality or morbidities. We are very uncertain of the safety of CGM and the available management algorithms, and many morbidities remain unreported. Preterm infants at risk of hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia were enrolled in all four included studies. No studies have been conducted in preterm infants with proven hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia. Long-term outcomes were not reported. Events of necrotizing enterocolitis, reported in the study published in 2021, were lower in the CGM group. However, the effect of CGM on this outcome remains very uncertain. Clinical trials are required to determine the most effective CGM and glycaemic management regimens in preterm infants before larger studies can be performed to assess the efficacy of CGM for reducing mortality, morbidity, and long-term neurodevelopmental impairments.
| S-EPMC8690212 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8631577 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6516999 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesContinuous glucose monitoring (CGM) could be a valuable instrument for measurement of glucose concentration in preterm neonate. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the diagnostic accuracy of CGM devices to intermittent blood glucose evaluation methods for the detection of hypoglycaemic or hypoglycaemic events in preterm infants.Data sourcesA structured electronic database search was performed for studies that assessed the accuracy of CGM against any intermittent blood glucose testing methods in detecting episodes of altered glycaemia in preterm infants. No restrictions were used. Three review authors screened records and included studies.Data extractionRisk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool. From individual patient data (IPD), sensitivity and specificity were determined using predefined thresholds. The mean absolute relative difference (MARD) of the studied CGM devices was assessed and if those satisfied the accuracy requirements (EN ISO 15197). IPD datasets were meta-analysed using a logistic mixed-effects model. A bivariate model was used to estimate the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) curve and extract the area under the curve (AUC). The overall level of certainty of the evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation.ResultsAmong 4481 records, 11 were included. IPD datasets were obtained for five studies. Only two of the studies showed an MARD lower than 10%, with none of the five CGM devices studied satisfying the European Union (EU) ISO 15197 requirements. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of CGM devices for hypoglycaemia were 0.39 and 0.99, whereas for hyperglycaemia were 0.87 and 0.99, respectively. The AUC was 0.70 and 0.86, respectively. The certainty of the evidence was considered as low to moderate. Limitations primarily related to the lack of representative population, reference standard and CGM device.ConclusionsCGM devices demonstrated low sensitivity for detecting hypoglycaemia in preterm infants, however, provided high accuracy for detection of hyperglycaemia.Prospero registration numberCRD42020152248.
| S-EPMC7768969 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Glycemic variability (GV) is common in preterm infants. In the premature population, GV is a risk factor for morbidity and mortality. Both hypo- and hyperglycemia can impair neurodevelopment. We investigated the impact of continuous versus intermittent tube enteral feeding on GV. In our prospective observational study, 20 preterm infants with a gestational age ≤ 34 weeks at either continuous or intermittent bolus full enteral feeding. For five days, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) was utilized, which was achieved through the subcutaneous insertion of a sensor. A total of 27,532 measurements of blood glucose were taken. The mean amplitude of glycemic excursions did not differ between the two cohorts statistically. Continuous feeding resulted in higher positive values, increasing the risk of hypo- and hyperglycemia. Subjects who were small for their gestational age had a higher standard deviation during continuous feeding (p = 0.001). Data suggest that intermittent bolus nutrition is better for glycemic control than continuous nutrition. Nutritional management optimization of preterm infants appears to be critical for long-term health. In the future, CGM may provide a better understanding of the optimal glucose targets for various clinical conditions, allowing for a more personalized approach to management.
| S-EPMC9598281 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHyperglycaemia and hypoglycaemia are common in preterm infants and have been associated with increased risk of mortality and morbidity. Interventions to reduce risk associated with these exposures are particularly challenging due to the infrequent measurement of blood glucose concentrations, with the potential of causing more harm instead of improving outcomes for these infants. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is widely used in adults and children with diabetes to improve glucose control, but has not been approved for use in neonates. The REACT trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CGM in preterm infants requiring intensive care.MethodsThis international, open-label, randomised controlled trial was done in 13 neonatal intensive care units in the UK, Spain, and the Netherlands. Infants were included if they were within 24 h of birth, had a birthweight of 1200 g or less, had a gestational age up to 33 weeks plus 6 days, and had parental written informed consent. Infants were randomly assigned (1:1) to real-time CGM or standard care (with masked CGM for comparison) using a central web randomisation system, stratified by recruiting centre and gestational age (<26 or ≥26 weeks). The primary efficacy outcome was the proportion of time sensor glucose concentration was 2·6-10 mmol/L for the first week of life. Safety outcomes related to hypoglycaemia (glucose concentrations <2·6 mmol/L) in the first 7 days of life. All outcomes were assessed on the basis of intention to treat in the full analysis set with available data. The study is registered with the International Standard Randomised Control Trials Registry, ISRCTN12793535.FindingsBetween July 4, 2016, and Jan 27, 2019, 182 infants were enrolled, 180 of whom were randomly assigned (85 to real-time CGM, 95 to standard care). 70 infants in the real-time CGM intervention group and 85 in the standard care group had CGM data and were included in the primary analysis. Compared with infants in the standard care group, infants managed using CGM had more time in the 2·6-10 mmol/L glucose concentration target range (mean proportion of time 84% [SD 22] vs 94% [11]; adjusted mean difference 8·9% [95% CI 3·4-14·4]), equivalent to 13 h (95% CI 5-21). More infants in the standard care group were exposed to at least one episode of sensor glucose concentration of less than 2·6 mmol/L for more than 1 h than those in the intervention group (13 [15%] of 85 vs four [6%] of 70). There were no serious adverse events related to the use of the device or episodes of infection.InterpretationReal-time CGM can reduce exposure to prolonged or severe hyperglycaemia and hypoglycaemia. Further studies using CGM are required to determine optimal glucose targets, strategies to obtain them, and the potential effect on long-term health outcomes.FundingNational Institute for Health Research Efficacy and Mechanisms Evaluation Programme.
| S-EPMC7970623 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6513592 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGlutamine is a conditionally essential amino acid. Endogenous biosynthesis may be insufficient for tissue needs in states of metabolic stress. Evidence exists that glutamine supplementation improves clinical outcomes in critically ill adults. It has been suggested that glutamine supplementation may also benefit preterm infants.ObjectivesTo determine the effects of glutamine supplementation on mortality and morbidity in preterm infants.Search methodsWe used the standard search strategy of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group. This included searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, 2015, Issue 12), MEDLINE, EMBASE and Maternity and Infant Care (to December 2015), conference proceedings and previous reviews.Selection criteriaRandomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials that compared glutamine supplementation versus no glutamine supplementation in preterm infants at any time from birth to discharge from hospital.Data collection and analysisWe extracted data using the standard methods of the Cochrane Neonatal Review Group, with separate evaluation of trial quality and data extraction by two review authors. We synthesised data using a fixed-effect model and reported typical relative risk, typical risk difference and weighted mean difference.Main resultsWe identified 12 randomised controlled trials in which a total of 2877 preterm infants participated. Six trials assessed enteral glutamine supplementation and six trials assessed parenteral glutamine supplementation. The trials were generally of good methodological quality. Meta-analysis did not find an effect of glutamine supplementation on mortality (typical relative risk 0.97, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.17; risk difference 0.00, 95% confidence interval -0.03 to 0.02) or major neonatal morbidities including the incidence of invasive infection or necrotising enterocolitis. Three trials that assessed neurodevelopmental outcomes in children aged 18 to 24 months and beyond did not find any effects.Authors' conclusionsThe available trial data do not provide evidence that glutamine supplementation confers important benefits for preterm infants.
| S-EPMC7055588 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To determine the effectiveness and safety of amino acids in preventing the mortality and morbidity among preterm infants. We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, Scopus, Cochrane, and Google Scholar, and grey literature, from databases inception to January 2021. We included randomized trials that evaluated any amino acids on preterm or low-birth weight infants. We performed frequentist pairwise and network meta-analyses and used the GRADE methodology to assess the certainty of the evidence and provide a summary of the results.We included 18 trials (3702 infants). Low certainty evidence showed that there seems to be no benefit for arginine, glutamine, or N-acetylcysteine in reducing all-cause mortality. Oral arginine likely results in reduction of necrotizin enterocolitis (NEC) stage ≥ II (OR 0.48; 95% CI 0.26-0.90; moderate certainty). Oral glutamine may reduce the likelihood of developing late-onset sepsis (LOS) compared to placebo (OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.47-0.82; low certainty); and likely reduces time to reach full enteral feeding (MD = - 2.63 days; 95% CI - 4.99 to - 0.27; moderate certainty). Amino acids may have no effect on mortality. Oral arginine may reduce severe NEC, and oral glutamine may reduce LOS and the time to reach full feeding.Systematic review registration: PROSPERO registration number: CRD4201603873.
| S-EPMC9622873 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8974932 | biostudies-literature