Abstract

IntroductionIn critical illness, four measures of glycaemic control are associated with ICU mortality: mean glucose concentration, glucose variability, the incidence of hypoglycaemia (≤ 2.2 mmol/l) or low glucose (2.3 to 4.7 mmol/l). Underlying diabetes mellitus (DM) might affect these associations. Our objective was to study whether the association between these measures of glycaemic control and ICU mortality differs between patients without and with DM and to explore the cutoff value for detrimental low glucose in both cohorts.MethodsThis retrospective database cohort study included patients admitted between January 2004 and June 2011 to a 24-bed medical/surgical ICU in a teaching hospital. We analysed glucose and outcome data from 10,320 patients: 8,682 without DM and 1,638 with DM. The cohorts were subdivided into quintiles of mean glucose and quartiles of glucose variability. Multivariable regression models were used to examine the independent association between the four measures of glycaemic control and ICU mortality, and for defining the cutoff value for detrimental low glucose.ResultsRegarding mean glucose, a U-shaped relation was observed in the non-DM cohort with an increased ICU mortality in the lowest and highest glucose quintiles (odds ratio = 1.4 and 1.8, P < 0.001). No clear pattern was found in the DM cohort. Glucose variability was related to ICU mortality only in the non-DM cohort, with highest ICU mortality in the upper variability quartile (odds ratio = 1.7, P < 0.001). Hypoglycaemia was associated with ICU mortality in both cohorts (odds ratio non-DM = 2.5, P < 0.001; odds ratio DM = 4.2, P = 0.001), while low-glucose concentrations up to 4.9 mmol/l were associated with an increased risk of ICU mortality in the non-DM cohort and up to 3.5 mmol/l in the DM cohort.ConclusionMean glucose and high glucose variability are related to ICU mortality in the non-DM cohort but not in the DM cohort. Hypoglycaemia (≤ 2.2 mmol/l) was associated with ICU mortality in both. The cutoff value for detrimental low glucose is higher in the non-DM cohort (4.9 mmol/l) than in the DM cohort (3.5 mmol/l). While hypoglycaemia (≤ 2.2 mmol/l) should be avoided in both groups, DM patients seem to tolerate a wider glucose range than non-DM patients.

Highlights

  • In critical illness, four measures of glycaemic control are associated with ICU mortality: mean glucose concentration, glucose variability, the incidence of hypoglycaemia (≤ 2.2 mmol/l) or low glucose (2.3 to 4.7 mmol/l)

  • Multivariable logistic regression analysis in the non-diabetes mellitus (DM) cohort showed that mean glucose values in the lowest and highest quintiles were associated with a significantly higher odds ratio (OR) for ICU mortality compared with the quintile with the lowest ICU mortality (Figure 2)

  • When exploring the cutoff value for detrimental low glucose in the non-DM cohort, we found that lowest blood glucose concentrations up to 4.9 mmol/l were associated with an increased risk for ICU mortality

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Four measures of glycaemic control are associated with ICU mortality: mean glucose concentration, glucose variability, the incidence of hypoglycaemia (≤ 2.2 mmol/l) or low glucose (2.3 to 4.7 mmol/l). In addition to the mean glucose concentration, glucose variability and hypoglycaemia, a fourth measure of glycaemic control - low glucose (2.3 to 4.7 mmol/l) - is associated with ICU mortality in the critically ill. Some studies found the opposite, with higher mortality rates for DM patients in the low-normal mean glucose range. These findings were unadjusted results only [18,20] and this relation was not significant after adjustment for severity of disease [16]. Some of the abovementioned findings are inconsistent and none of the reviewed studies evaluated all four measures of glycaemic control concomitantly

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
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.