Abstract
To compare the effect of intensive versus conventional blood glucose control in patients with traumatic brain injury. In a large international randomized trial patients were randomly assigned to a target blood glucose (BG) range of either 4.5-6.0 mmol/L (intensive control) or <10 mmol/L (conventional control). Patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) were identified at randomization and data were collected to examine the extended Glasgow outcome score (includes mortality) at 24 months. Of the 6104 randomized patients, 391 satisfied diagnostic criteria for TBI; 203 (51.9%) were assigned to intensive and 188 (48.1%) to conventional control; the primary outcome was available for 166 (81.8%) and 149 (79.3%) patients, respectively. The two groups had similar baseline characteristics. At 2 years 98 (58.7%) patients in the intensive group and 79 (53.0%) in the conventional group had a favorable neurological outcome (odds ratio [OR] 1.26, 95% CI 0.81-1.97; P = 0.3); 35 patients (20.9%) in the intensive group and 34 (22.8%) in the conventional group had died (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.53-1.53; P = 0.7); moderate hypoglycemia (BG 2.3-3.9 mmol/L; 41-70 mg/dL) occurred in 160/202 (79.2%) and 17/188 (9.0%), respectively (OR 38.3, 95% CI 21.0-70.1; P < 0.0001); severe hypoglycemia (BG ≤ 2.2 mmol/L; ≤40 mg/dL) in 10 (4.9%) and 0 (0.0%), respectively (OR 20.5 95% CI 1.2-351.6, P = 0.003). Although patients with traumatic brain injury randomly assigned to intensive compared to conventional glucose control experienced moderate and severe hypoglycemia more frequently, we found no significant difference in clinically important outcomes.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
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.