Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35842591›Full record

ArticleBMC anesthesiology2022

Glycemic control in critically ill patients with or without diabetes.

Ka Man Fong, Shek Yin Au, George Wing Yiu Ng

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC anesthesiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Hydrocortisone for Septic Shock, Bolus or Infusion: Pro, Con, May be.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Ka Man FongDepartment of Intensive Care, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 30 Gascoigne Road, Kowloon, Hong Kong. ckmfong@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-1491-5335
Shek Yin AuDepartment of Medicine, Tseung Kwan O Hospital, Tseung Kwan O, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0001-8331-2250
George Wing Yiu NgDepartment of Intensive Care, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, 30 Gascoigne Road, Kowloon, Hong Kong.ORCID 0000-0003-0883-1792
Queen Elizabeth Hospital · GBQueen Elizabeth Hospital · CNTseung Kwan O Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEarly randomized controlled trials have demonstrated the benefits of tight glucose control. Subsequent NICE-SUGAR study found that tight glucose control increased mortality. The optimal glucose target in diabetic and nondiabetic patients remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between blood glucose levels and outcomes in critically ill patients with or without diabetes.

methodsThis was a retrospective analysis of the eICU database. Repeat ICU stays, ICU stays of less than 2 days, patients transferred from other ICUs, those with less than 2 blood glucose measurements, and those with missing data on hospital mortality were excluded. The primary outcome was hospital mortality. Generalised additive models were used to model relationship between glycemic control and mortality. Models were adjusted for age, APACHE IV scores, body mass index, admission diagnosis, mechanical ventilation, and use of vasopressor or inotropic agents.

resultsThere were 52,107 patients in the analysis. Nondiabetes patients exhibited a J-shaped association between time-weighted average glucose and hospital mortality, while this association in diabetes patients was right-shifted and flattened. Using a TWA glucose of 100 mg/dL as the reference value, the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of TWA glucose of 140 mg/dL was 3.05 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.03-3.08) in nondiabetes and 1.14 (95% CI 1.08-1.20) in diabetes patients. The adjusted OR of TWA glucose of 180 mg/dL were 4.20 (95% CI 4.07-4.33) and 1.49 (1.41-1.57) in patients with no diabetes and patients with diabetes, respectively. The adjusted ORs of TWA glucose of 80 mg/dL compared with 100 mg/dL were 1.74 (95% CI 1.57-1.92) in nondiabetes and 1.36 (95% CI 1.12-1.66) in patients with diabetes. The glucose ranges associated with a below-average risk of mortality were 80-120 mg/dL and 90-150 mg/dL for nondiabetes and diabetes patients, respectively. Hypoglycemia was associated with increased hospital mortality in both groups but to a lesser extent in diabetic patients. Glucose variability was positively associated with hospital mortality in nondiabetics.

conclusionsTime-weighted average glucose, hypoglycemia, and glucose variability had different impacts on clinical outcomes in patients with and without diabetes. Compared with nondiabetic patients, diabetic patients showed a more blunted response to hypo- and hyperglycemia and glucose variability. Glycemic control strategies should be reconsidered to avoid both hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia.

Indexed as

Diabetes MellitusHyperglycemiaHypoglycemiaBlood GlucoseCritical IllnessGlycemic ControlHumansInsulinRetrospective StudiesBlood GlucoseInsulinBlood glucoseDiabetesElectronic health recordHyperglycemiaHypoglycemiaICUInsulin therapyStress-induced hyperglycemia

Identifiers

PMID35842591
PMCPMC9288031
OpenAlexW4285587583

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.