Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36263915›Full record

ArticleActa anaesthesiologica Scandinavica2023

Glycemic control and blood gas sampling frequency during continuous glucose monitoring in the intensive care unit: A before-and-after study.

Johan Mårtensson, Salvatore Cutuli, Fumitaka Yanase, Paolo Ancona, Lisa Toh, Eduardo Osawa, Rinaldo Bellomo

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Mean Blood Glucose Level During ICU Hospitalization is a Strong Predictor of the Mortality of COVID-19.Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and obesity : targets and therapy · 2024
    Article
  4. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Johan MårtenssonDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology, Section of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Salvatore CutuliDepartment of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Fumitaka YanaseDepartment of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Paolo AnconaDepartment of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Lisa TohDepartment of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Eduardo OsawaDepartment of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Rinaldo BellomoDepartment of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Austin Hospital · AUAgostino Gemelli University Polyclinic · ITKarolinska University Hospital · SEMonash University · AUThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AU

Funding

Stockholm County Council and Karolinska Institutet
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhether subcutaneous continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) can safely replace intermittent arterial blood gas glucose analyses in intensive care unit (ICU) patients remains uncertain. We aimed to compare CGM to blood gas glucose values and assess whether CGM use reduces blood gas sampling frequency and glucose variability in ICU patients with type 2 diabetes managed with liberal glucose control.

methodsWe used the FreeStyle Libre CGM in 15 ICU patients and compared their blood glucose metrics with a pre-CGM control population of 105 ICU patients with type 2 diabetes. Both groups received insulin to target glucose range of 10-14 mmol/L. We used linear regression analysis adjusted for illness severity to assess the association of CGM use with blood gas sampling frequency and glucose variability. We used mean absolute relative difference (MARD) and Clarke error grid analysis to assess accuracy of matched CGM-blood glucose values overall, across glucose stata (<10, 10-14, >14 mmol/L), and over time (≤48, 48-96, >96 h).

resultsWe analyzed 483 matched glucose values. Overall MARD was 11.5 (95% CI, 10.7-12.3)% with 99% of readings in Clarke zones A and B. MARD was 15.5% for glucose values <10 mmol/L, 11.1% at 10-14 mmol/L, and 11.4% >14 mmol/L. MARD was 13.8% in the first 48 h, 10.9% at 48-96 h, and 8.9% beyond 96 h. CGM use was associated with 30% reduction in blood gas sampling frequency. CGM use was not associated with glucose variability as determined by glycemic lability index or standard deviation of blood glucose.

conclusionsIn our cohort of ICU patients with type 2 diabetes receiving liberal glycemic control, CGM showed acceptable accuracy and was associated with a reduction in blood gas sampling frequency without compromising glucose control. Lowest accuracy was observed at glucose values below 10 mmol/L and during the first 48 h of CGM use.

Indexed as

Blood GlucoseDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2Blood Glucose Self-MonitoringGlycemic ControlGlycemic IndexHumansIntensive Care UnitsBlood Glucosecontinuous glucose monitoringcritical careglucose variabilityhyperglycemiatype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID36263915
PMCPMC10092568
OpenAlexW4306871299

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.