Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23883613›Full record

Trial reportCritical care (London, England)2013

Feasibility of fully automated closed-loop glucose control using continuous subcutaneous glucose measurements in critical illness: a randomized controlled trial.

Lalantha Leelarathna, Shane W English, Hood Thabit, Karen Caldwell, Janet M Allen, Kavita Kumareswaran, Malgorzata E Wilinska, Marianna Nodale, Jasdip Mangat, Mark L Evans and 2 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Critical care (London, England), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01440842 (An Open-label, Single-centre, Randomised Controlled Trial to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Automated Closed-loop Blood Glucose Control in Comparison With Standard Care in Adults in Intensive Care Unit), which is not on this map. Cited by 52 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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.

NCT01440842 phase2completednot on this map

An Open-label, Single-centre, Randomised Controlled Trial to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of Automated Closed-loop Blood Glucose Control in Comparison With Standard Care in Adults in Intensive Care Unit

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of CambridgeRan2012 to 2012Enrolled24ConditionsStress HyperglycaemiaArmsClosed-loop insulin delivery, Standard IV insulin infusion sliding scale
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 119 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Feasibility of automated insulin delivery guided by continuous glucose monitoring in preterm infants.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2020
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Group-based trajectory modeling identifies distinct glycemic patterns predictive of mortality in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Continuous Glucose Monitoring in the Intensive Care Unit.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2023
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Lalantha Leelarathna
Shane W English
Hood Thabit
Karen Caldwell
Janet M Allen
Kavita Kumareswaran
Malgorzata E Wilinska
Marianna Nodale
Jasdip Mangat
Mark L Evans
Rowan Burnstein
Roman Hovorka
Addenbrooke's Hospital · GBWellcome/MRC Institute of Metabolic Science · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GBWellcome Trust · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council G0600717Medical Research Council MC_UU_12012/5
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionClosed-loop (CL) systems modulate insulin delivery according to glucose levels without nurse input. In a prospective randomized controlled trial, we evaluated the feasibility of an automated closed-loop approach based on subcutaneous glucose measurements in comparison with a local sliding-scale insulin-therapy protocol.

methodsTwenty-four critically ill adults (predominantly trauma and neuroscience patients) with hyperglycemia (glucose, ≥10 mM) or already receiving insulin therapy, were randomized to receive either fully automated closed-loop therapy (model predictive control algorithm directing insulin and 20% dextrose infusion based on FreeStyle Navigator continuous subcutaneous glucose values, n = 12) or a local protocol (n = 12) with intravenous sliding-scale insulin, over a 48-hour period. The primary end point was percentage of time when arterial blood glucose was between 6.0 and 8.0 mM.

resultsThe time when glucose was in the target range was significantly increased during closed-loop therapy (54.3% (44.1 to 72.8) versus 18.5% (0.1 to 39.9), P = 0.001; median (interquartile range)), and so was time in wider targets, 5.6 to 10.0 mM and 4.0 to 10.0 mM (P ≤ 0.002), reflecting a reduced glucose exposure >8 and >10 mM (P ≤ 0.002). Mean glucose was significantly lower during CL (7.8 (7.4 to 8.2) versus 9.1 (8.3 to 13.0] mM; P = 0.001) without hypoglycemia (<4 mM) during either therapy.

conclusionsFully automated closed-loop control based on subcutaneous glucose measurements is feasible and may provide efficacious and hypoglycemia-free glucose control in critically ill adults.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT01440842.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessBlood GlucoseCross-Over StudiesFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansInfusions, IntravenousInsulinMaleMiddle AgedMonitoring, PhysiologicProspective StudiesSubcutaneous TissueBlood GlucoseInsulin

Identifiers

PMID23883613
PMCPMC4056260
OpenAlexW2148654972

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.