Abstract

The evidence supporting intensive blood glucose control to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs) among liver transplant recipients is insufficient. We aimed to assess the effects of postoperative intensive blood glucose control (IBGC) against standard blood glucose control (SBGC) on the incidence of SSIs among adult liver transplant recipients. We performed a randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03474666). The IBGC target was 80 to 130 mg/dL, and the SBGC target was below 180 mg/dL. Analyses were made on an intention-to-treat basis. Of the 41 recipients enrolled onto the trial, 20 were randomly allocated to the IBGC group and 21 to the SBGC group. There were no significant differences in SSIs among recipients allocated to either group (relative risk [RR], 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.21-2.88; P=.69). Mean (SD) blood glucose levels were significantly lower in the IBGC group in the 24-hour period after surgery (145.0 [20.7] mg/dL and 230.2 [51.6] mg/dL; P=.001). While there were fewer episodes of hypoglycemia in the IBGC group, this was not statistically significant. There were no episodes of severe hypoglycemia in either group. Hyperglycemia and severe hyperglycemia were significantly more frequent in the SBGC group (RR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52-0.93; P=.001 and RR, 0.07; 95% CI, 0.01-0.48; P=.001, respectively). Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter for recipients in the IBGC group (13.1 [5.5] days vs 19.3 [12.1] days; P=.04). Although this small trial did not find intensive control reduced SSI, it was associated with lower blood glucose levels, fewer episodes of hyperglycemia and severe hyperglycemia, and shorter length of hospital stay.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.