Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21297519›Full record

ArticlePediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies2011

A critical appraisal of Vlasselaers D, Milants I, Desmet L, et al: intensive insulin therapy for patients in paediatric intensive care: a prospective, randomised controlled study. Lancet 2009; 373:547-556.

Kalia P Ulate

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric critical care medicine : a journal of the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the World Federation of Pediatric Intensive and Critical Care Societies, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kalia P UlateDepartment of Pediatric Critical Care, Seattle Children's Hospital, Seattle, WA, USA.
Foundation for Human Potential · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo review findings and discuss implications of strict glycemic control in children.

designCritical appraisal of a randomized controlled trial.

findingsThis is the largest prospective randomized controlled trial to date, comparing intensive insulin therapy (glycemic targets: 50.4-79.2 mg/dL [2.8-4.4 mmol/L] and 70.2-99 mg/dL [3.9-5.5 mmol/L] [for infants and children, respectively]) and conventional insulin therapy (target: 180-215 mg/dl [10-11.9 mmol/L]) among critically ill children. Groups were similar at enrollment and had comparable forms of nutrition and glucose infusion rates. Steroid use and vasoactive-inotrope scores were not compared. Intensive insulin therapy reduced pediatric intensive care unit length of stay (primary outcome measure) and attenuated C-reactive protein concentrations >5 days. The effect of intensive insulin therapy on secondary outcome measures was precise in regards to significant reductions in secondary infection occurrence (absolute risk reduction = 7.6% [95% confidence interval: 0.6-14.4], number needed to treat = 14 [95% confidence interval: 7-179]) and need for vasoactive support beyond 2 days (absolute risk reduction = 10.4% [95% confidence interval: 3-17], number needed to treat = 10 [95% confidence interval: 6-30]). Mortality decreased with intensive insulin therapy (p = .038); however, this finding was imprecise (absolute risk reduction = 3.1% [95% confidence interval: 0.2-5.4], number needed to treat = 33 [95% confidence interval: 18.6-597.3]). The incidence of hypoglycemia was significantly higher with intensive insulin therapy (absolute risk increase = 23.5% [95% confidence interval: 20-25%], number needed to harm = 4 [95% confidence interval: 4-5]). Long-term effects on outcomes were not evaluated, and the authors recognize the need for such follow-up studies. This study demonstrated efficacy of intensive insulin therapy at the same institution where the original adult intensive insulin therapy trial was conducted, but it may not demonstrate effectiveness in populations other than postoperative cardiac patients, which composed the majority of patients enrolled or in institutions without a highly experienced nursing staff to manage intensive insulin therapy.

conclusionsThis was a well-designed single-center trial that serves as proof of concept. The effects of intensive insulin therapy on mortality require further investigation, and its practice may need refinement to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia. In the meantime, targeting age-adjusted fasting glucose ranges cannot be routinely recommended in critically ill children.

Identifiers

PMID21297519
OpenAlexW2093651143

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.