Intensive perioperative glucose control does not improve outcomes of patients submitted to open-heart surgery: a randomized controlled trial. Reduction of nosocomial infections in the surgical intensive-care unit by strict glycemic control. Intensive intraoperative insulin therapy versus conventional glucose management during cardiac surgery: a randomized trial. Nurse case management to improve glycemic control in diabetic patients in a health maintenance organization. A randomized, controlled trial. Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients. Incremental value of continuous glucose monitoring when starting pump therapy in patients with poorly controlled type 1 diabetes: the RealTrend study. A randomised, controlled pilot study to investigate the potential benefit of intervention with insulin in hyperglycaemic acute ischaemic stroke patients. Glycaemic impact of patient-led use of sensor-guided pump therapy in type 1 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial. Glucose Regulation in Acute Stroke Patients (GRASP) trial: a randomized pilot trial.
The objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between different target levels of glucose and the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.
                We designed a prospective study in a university hospital where 109 consecutive patients were enrolled during a six-month period. All patients were scheduled for open-heart surgery requiring cardiopulmonary bypass. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups. One group consisted of 55 patients and had a target glucose level of 80-130 mg/dl, while the other contained 54 patients and had a target glucose level of 160-200 mg/dl. These parameters were controlled during surgery and for 36 hours after surgery in the intensive care unit. Primary outcomes were clinical outcomes, including time of mechanical ventilation, length of stay in the intensive care unit, infection, hypoglycemia, renal or neurological dysfunction, blood transfusion and length of stay in the hospital. The secondary outcome was a combined end-point (mortality at 30 days, infection or length of stay in the intensive care unit of more than 3 days). A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant.
                The anthropometric and clinical characteristics of the patients from each group were similar, except for weight and body mass index. The mean glucose level during the protocol period was 126.69 mg/dl in the treated group and 168.21 mg/dl in the control group (p<0.0016). There were no differences between groups regarding clinical outcomes, including the duration of mechanical ventilation, length of stay in the intensive care unit, blood transfusion, postoperative infection, hypoglycemic event, neurological dysfunction or 30-day mortality (p>0.05).
                In 109 patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass, both protocols of glycemic control in an intraoperative setting and in the intensive care unit were found to be safe, easily achieved and not to differentially affect clinical outcomes. To investigate whether hyperglycemia in glucose-intolerant patients without diabetes could lead to increased nosocomial infections in the surgical intensive-care unit (ICU).
                A prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted in the surgical ICU of a large teaching hospital in Hartford, Connecticut. Adult patients admitted to a 12-bed surgical ICU requiring treatment of hyperglycemia (glucose values > or = 140 mg/dL) were randomly assigned to receive standard insulin therapy (target glucose range, 180 to 220 mg/dL) or strict insulin therapy (target glucose range, 80 to 120 mg/dL) throughout their ICU stay. Demographic data, comorbidities, and confounding variables were analyzed. Outcome measures included mean daily serum glucose values, mean daily insulin doses, and number of nosocomial infections during the ICU stay.
                The study was completed by 61 critically ill surgical patients (27 in the standard glucose control group and 34 in the strict glucose control group). A significant reduction (P<0.001) in mean daily glucose level was achieved in the strict glycemic control group (125 +/- 36 mg/dL) in comparison with the standard glycemic control group (179 +/- 61 mg/dL). Furthermore, a significant reduction (P<0.05) in the incidence of total nosocomial infections, including intravascular device, bloodstream, intravascular device-related bloodstream, and surgical site infections, was observed in the strict glucose control group in comparison with the standard glucose control group. The incidence of hypoglycemia (glucose levels <60 mg/dL) was significantly increased (P<0.001) in the strict glycemic control group in comparison with the standard glycemic control group (32% versus 7.4% of patients or 0.8% versus 0.1% of total serum glucose values, respectively).
                Strict glycemic control is a safe and effective method for reducing the incidence of nosocomial infections in a predominantly nondiabetic, general surgical ICU patient population. It is not known whether rigorous intraoperative glycemic control reduces death and morbidity in cardiac surgery patients.
                To compare outcomes of intensive insulin therapy during cardiac surgery with those of conventional intraoperative glucose management.
                A randomized, open-label, controlled trial with blinded end point assessment.
                Tertiary care center.
                Adults with and without diabetes who were undergoing on-pump cardiac surgery.
                The primary outcome was a composite of death, sternal infections, prolonged ventilation, cardiac arrhythmias, stroke, and renal failure within 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcome measures were length of stay in the intensive care unit and hospital.
                Patients were randomly assigned to receive continuous insulin infusion to maintain intraoperative glucose levels between 4.4 (80 mg/dL) and 5.6 mmol/L (100 mg/dL) (n = 199) or conventional treatment (n = 201). Patients in the conventional treatment group were not given insulin during surgery unless glucose levels were greater than 11.1 mmol/L (>200 mg/dL). Both groups were treated with insulin infusion to maintain normoglycemia after surgery.
                Mean glucose concentrations were statistically significantly lower in the intensive treatment group at the end of surgery (6.3 mmol/L [SD, 1.6] [114 mg/dL {SD, 29}] in the intensive treatment group vs. 8.7 mmol/L [SD, 2.3] [157 mg/dL {SD, 42}] in the conventional treatment group; difference, -2.4 mmol/L [95% CI, -2.8 to -1.9 mmol/L] [-43 mg/dL {CI, -50 to -35 mg/dL}]). Eighty two of 185 patients (44%) in the intensive treatment group and 86 of 186 patients (46%) in the conventional treatment group had an event (risk ratio, 1.0 [CI, 0.8 to 1.2]). More deaths (4 deaths vs. 0 deaths; P = 0.061) and strokes (8 strokes vs. 1 strokes; P = 0.020) occurred in the intensive treatment group. Length of stay in the intensive care unit (mean, 2 days [SD, 2] vs. 2 days [SD, 3]; difference, 0 days [CI, -1 to 1 days]) and in the hospital (mean, 8 days [SD, 4] vs. 8 days [SD, 5]; difference, 0 days [CI, -1 to 0 days]) was similar for both groups.
                This single-center study used a composite end point and could not examine whether outcomes differed by diabetes status.
                Intensive insulin therapy during cardiac surgery does not reduce perioperative death or morbidity. The increased incidence of death and stroke in the intensive treatment group raises concern about routine implementation of this intervention. Control of hyperglycemia delays or prevents complications of diabetes, but many persons with diabetes do not achieve optimal control.
                To compare diabetes control in patients receiving nurse case management and patients receiving usual care.
                Randomized, controlled trial.
                Primary care clinics in a group-model health maintenance organization (HMO).
                17 patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and 121 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
                The nurse case manager followed written management algorithms under the direction of a family physician and an endocrinologist. Changes in therapy were communicated to primary care physicians. All patients received ongoing care through their primary care physicians.
                The primary outcome, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) value, was measured at baseline and at 12 months. Fasting blood glucose levels, medication type and dose, body weight, blood pressure, lipid levels, patient-perceived health status, episodes of severe hypoglycemia, and emergency department and hospital admissions were also assessed.
                72% of patients completed follow-up. Patients in the nurse case management group had mean decreases of 1.7 percentage points in HbA1c values and 43 mg/dL (2.38 mmol/L) in fasting glucose levels; patients in the usual care group had decreases of 0.6 percentage points in HbA1c values and 15 mg/dL (0.83 mmol/L) in fasting glucose levels (P < 0.01). Self-reported health status improved in the nurse case management group (P = 0.02). The nurse case management intervention was not associated with statistically significant changes in medication type or dose, body weight, blood pressure, or lipids or with adverse events.
                A nurse case manager with considerable management responsibility can, in association with primary care physicians and an endocrinologist, help improve glycemic control in diabetic patients in a group-model HMO. The optimal target range for blood glucose in critically ill patients remains unclear.
                Within 24 hours after admission to an intensive care unit (ICU), adults who were expected to require treatment in the ICU on 3 or more consecutive days were randomly assigned to undergo either intensive glucose control, with a target blood glucose range of 81 to 108 mg per deciliter (4.5 to 6.0 mmol per liter), or conventional glucose control, with a target of 180 mg or less per deciliter (10.0 mmol or less per liter). We defined the primary end point as death from any cause within 90 days after randomization.
                Of the 6104 patients who underwent randomization, 3054 were assigned to undergo intensive control and 3050 to undergo conventional control; data with regard to the primary outcome at day 90 were available for 3010 and 3012 patients, respectively. The two groups had similar characteristics at baseline. A total of 829 patients (27.5%) in the intensive-control group and 751 (24.9%) in the conventional-control group died (odds ratio for intensive control, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 1.02 to 1.28; P=0.02). The treatment effect did not differ significantly between operative (surgical) patients and nonoperative (medical) patients (odds ratio for death in the intensive-control group, 1.31 and 1.07, respectively; P=0.10). Severe hypoglycemia (blood glucose level, < or = 40 mg per deciliter [2.2 mmol per liter]) was reported in 206 of 3016 patients (6.8%) in the intensive-control group and 15 of 3014 (0.5%) in the conventional-control group (P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups in the median number of days in the ICU (P=0.84) or hospital (P=0.86) or the median number of days of mechanical ventilation (P=0.56) or renal-replacement therapy (P=0.39).
                In this large, international, randomized trial, we found that intensive glucose control increased mortality among adults in the ICU: a blood glucose target of 180 mg or less per deciliter resulted in lower mortality than did a target of 81 to 108 mg per deciliter. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00220987.)
                2009 Massachusetts Medical Society To compare the improvements in glycemic control associated with transitioning to insulin pump therapy in patients using continuous glucose monitoring versus standard blood glucose self-monitoring.
                The RealTrend study was a 6-month, randomized, parallel-group, two-arm, open-label study of 132 adults and children with uncontrolled type 1 diabetes (A1C >or=8%) being treated with multiple daily injections. One group was fitted with the Medtronic MiniMed Paradigm REAL-Time system (PRT group), an insulin pump with integrated continuous subcutaneous glucose monitoring (CGM) capability, with instructions to wear CGM sensors at least 70% of the time. Conventional insulin pump therapy was initiated in the other group (continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion [CSII] group). Outcome measures included A1C and glycemic variability.
                A total of 115 patients completed the study. Between baseline and trial end, A1C improved significantly in both groups (PRT group -0.81 +/- 1.09%, P < 0.001; CSII group -0.57 +/- 0.94%, P < 0.001), with no significant difference between groups. When the 91 patients who were fully protocol-compliant (including CGM sensor wear >or=70% of the time) were considered, A1C improvement was significantly greater in the PRT group (P = 0.004) (PRT group -0.96 +/- 0.93%, P < 0.001; CSII group -0.55 +/- 0.93%, P < 0.001). Hyperglycemia parameters decreased in line with improvements in A1C with no impact on hypoglycemia.
                CGM-enabled insulin pump therapy improves glycemia more than conventional pump therapy during the first 6 months of pump use in patients who wear CGM sensors at least 70% of the time. Hyperglycaemia on presentation with acute ischaemic stroke (AIS) is associated with poor outcome, but intervention is unproven. We investigated the safety and tolerability of one method of glycaemic control.
                Patients within 24 h of AIS and plasma glucose 8-20 mmol/l were randomised to receive either rigorous glycaemic control (RC) or standard management (SM) for 48 h. RC comprised i.v. insulin at a variable rate adjusted for target glucose concentration of 5-8 mmol/l, and intravenous crystalloid. The SM group received intravenous crystalloid alone in an open-label design.
                Thirteen patients were randomised to RC and 12 to SM (age 75 +/- 6.2 years; 40% male; 20% lacunar stroke; time to treatment 8 +/- 6.1 h; plasma glucose 10.6 +/- 0.9 mmol/l; known diabetes 52%; NIHSS 8, range 2-28). The glucose concentration-time curve was reduced in the RC group (AUC 324 +/- 15 versus 385 +/- 28 h.mmol/l, p = 0.04). By 48 h, plasma glucose in both groups was 6.8 +/- 1.1 and 7.5 +/- 1.3 mmol/l respectively, but mean hourly insulin requirements in the RC group had dropped from 3.25 +/- 0.32 units to 1.25 +/- 0.5 units (p < 0.01). One transient episode of hypoglycaemic symptoms occurred in the RC group.
                Glycaemic control with sliding scale insulin for 48 h is feasible and well-tolerated after AIS. Treatment after 48 h may be unnecessary.
                Copyright 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of patient-led sensor-guided pump management on glycaemic control, and compare the effect with that of standard insulin pump therapy.
                An open multicentre parallel randomised controlled trial was conducted at five tertiary diabetes centres. Participants aged 13.0-40.0 years with well-controlled type 1 diabetes were randomised 1:1 to either study group for 3 months. Randomisation was carried out using a central computer-generated schedule. Participants in the intervention group used sensor-guided pump management; no instructive guidelines in interpreting real-time data were provided ('patient-led' use). Participants in the control group continued their original insulin pump regimen. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and HbA(1c) level were used to assess outcomes. The primary outcome was the difference in the proportion of time in the target glycaemic range during the 3 month study period (derived from CGM, target range 4-10 mmol/l). Secondary outcomes were difference in HbA(1c), time in hypoglycaemic (< or =3.9 mmol/l) and hyperglycaemic (> or =10.1 mmol/l) ranges and glycaemic variability.
                Sixty-two participants were recruited and randomised; 5/31 and 2/31 withdrew from intervention and control groups, respectively, leaving 26/31 and 29/31 for the intention-to-treat analyses. When adjusted for baseline values, the mean end-of-study HbA(1c) was 0.43% lower in the intervention group compared with the control group (95% CI 0.19 to 0.75%; p = 0.009). No difference was observed in CGM-derived time in target (measured difference 1.72; 95% CI -5.37 to 8.81), hypoglycaemic (0.54; 95% CI -3.48 to 4.55) or hyperglycaemic (-2.18; 95% CI -10.0 to 5.69) range or in glycaemic variability (-0.29; 95% CI -0.34 to 0.28). Within the intervention group, HbA(1c) was 0.51% lower in participants with sensor use > or =70% compared with participants with sensor use <70% (95% CI -0.98 to -0.04, p = 0.04). Five episodes of device malfunction occurred.
                Individuals established on insulin pump therapy can employ sensor-guided pump management to improve glycaemic control. An apparent dose-dependent effect of sensor usage was noted; however, frequent use of this technology (> or =70%) was not universally acceptable.
                ACTRN12606000049572 Hyperglycemia is associated with worse outcome in patients with acute stroke.
                We conducted a prospective, randomized, multicenter, 3-arm trial (tight control [target 70 to 110 mg/dL], loose control [target 70 to 200 mg/dL], and control usual care [70 to 300 mg/dL]) to assess the feasibility and safety of 2 insulin infusion protocol targets in patients with acute ischemic stroke. The planned sample was 72 subjects.
                A total of 74 subjects were enrolled. Seventy-two (97%) had data available for the primary analyses and 73 (99%) had 3-month clinical outcome data. Median age was 67 years, median National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score was 8, median glucose was 163 mg/dL, and median time to randomization was 10.7 hours. Fifty-nine percent of patients were diabetic, 35% received thrombolysis, and 14% of subjects died within 3 months. The loose control and usual care groups had median glucose concentrations of 151 mg/dL. The tight control group had a median glucose concentration of 111 mg/dL. The loose control group spent 90% of the first 24 hours in target and the tight group 44% of time in target. There was only one symptomatic patient with hypoglycemia in the loose control group (4%) and zero in the tight control group. The overall rates of hypoglycemia (<55 mg/dL) were 4% in control, 4% in loose, and 30% in tight. Exploratory efficacy analysis was conducted.
                Insulin infusion for patients with acute ischemic stroke is feasible and safe using the insulin infusion protocol in the Glucose Regulation in Acute Stroke Patients (GRASP) trial. Exploratory efficacy analysis supports further comparative study.
There is insufficient evidence to support strict glycaemic control versus conventional management (maintenance of glucose < 200 mg/dL) for the prevention of SSIs. No trials were found that evaluated strict glycaemic control in the immediate pre-operative period or outside the setting of an intensive care unit. The trials were limited by small sample size, inconsistencies in the definitions of the outcome measures and methodological quality. Further large randomised trials are required to address this question and may be most appropriately performed in patients at high risk for SSIs.