Trial reportMedicine2017
Intensive insulin therapy for preventing postoperative infection in patients with traumatic brain injury: A randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intensive vs. conventional insulin therapy in neurosurgical patients: a meta-analysis of postoperative infections and hypoglycemic risks.Neurosurgical review · 2025Pooled it
- Is intensive glucose control bad for critically ill patients? A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of biological sciences · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Trial
- Efficacy of methylphenidate for the treatment of mental sequelae after traumatic brain injury.Medicine · 2017Trial
- Glycemic Control in Severe Acute Brain Injury: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis with Trial Sequential Analysis.Neurocritical care · 2026Review
- The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2024.Journal of intensive care · 2025Article
- Perioperative glycaemic control for people with diabetes undergoing surgery.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Review
- Glycaemic control for patients with severe acute brain injury: Protocol for a systematic review.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2023Article
- A Retrospective Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on Traumatic Brain Injury: Evaluation of CONSORT Item Adherence.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020).Journal of intensive care · 2021Article
- Lack of recognition and documentation of stress hyperglycemia is a disruptor of optimal continuity of care.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Article
- Intensive glucose control for critically ill patients: an updated meta-analysis.Endocrine connections · 2018Article
- Effects of perioperative tight glycemic control on postoperative outcomes: a meta-analysis.Endocrine connections · 2018Review
- The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2024.Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
- The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020).Acute medicine & surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the effect of intensive insulin therapy (IIT) for preventing postoperative infection in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI).
methodsIn total, 88 patients with TBI were randomly divided into 2 groups, 44 in each group. One group (group ITT) received IIT and the other group (group CIT) received conventional insulin therapy (CIT). This study was conducted between February 2013 and January 2016. Outcomes included infection rate, mortality, and neurological outcome (measured by the Glasgow Outcome Scale [GOS]).
resultsA total of 81 patients completed the study. IIT showed greater efficacy than CIT, with a decreased infection rate in the IIT group compared to the CIT group (31.9% vs 52.3%, P = 0.03), and also a reduced duration of stay in intensive care unit (ICU) (IIT group, 4.5 ± 2.1 days vs CIT group, 5.7 ± 2.8 days, P = 0.02). In addition, a significant difference in scores on the GOS scale was observed between the 2 groups (P = 0.04). The mortality rates in hospital and at the 26-week follow-up were similar between the 2 groups.
conclusionIIT leads to a reduced infection rate, shorter stays in ICU, and improved neurological outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.