Objective

Glycemic control is a rapidly developing field in intensive care medicine with the aim of reducing mortality, morbidity, and cost. Current intensive care unit (ICU) glucose measurement technologies are susceptible to interference from medications, volume expanders, and other substances present in critically ill patients. We hypothesized that a fixed-wavelength mid-infrared (mid-IR) spectroscopy system would be accurate for measuring glucose levels of ICU patients.

Research Design and Methods

This is a prospective investigation of plasma samples from two different institutions treating a heterogeneous population of ICU patients. The first 292 samples were collected from 86 patients admitted to Stamford Hospital, and the next 352 samples were collected from 75 patients from three ICUs at the University of Maryland. Plasma samples were measured on a Fourier-transform infrared or a proprietary spectrometer, with a glucose prediction algorithm to correct for spectral interference, which were compared with reference measurements taken using a YSI 2300 glucose analyzer.

Results

Glucose values ranged from 24 to 343 mg/dl. Numerous medications and injury/disease states were observed in the patient populations, with metoprolol, fentanyl, and multiple organ failure the most prevalent. Despite these interferents, there was a high correlation (r ≥ 0.94) and low standard error (≤12.8 mg/dl) between the predicted glucose values and those of the YSI 2300 STAT Plus reference instrument in the three studies. A total of 95.1% of the 644 values in the three studies met International Organization for Standardization 15197 criteria.

Conclusion

These results suggest that a fixed-wavelength mid-IR spectrometer can measure glucose accurately in the plasma of ICU patients.

Failed extubation (FE), defined as reintubation 48 or 72 hours after planned extubation, occurs in a significant percentage of patients and is associated with a substantial burden of morbidity and mortality. This commentary reviews the literature describing FE rates and the clinical consequences of FE and proposes an 'optimal' rate of FE as well as avenues for future research.

The major interventional trials of intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients have reached divergent results. The present viewpoint article explores some of the potential reasons, including differences in monitoring technology and protocol design and performance, the occurrence of severe hypoglycemia and changes in the standard of care since publication of the landmark single-center trial. Recently published data detailing the deleterious effect of hypoglycemia are discussed, as is the emerging body of literature describing the important impact of glycemic variability on the risk of mortality in heterogeneous populations of acutely ill and severely ill patients. These new findings have important implications for the design of future interventional trials of intensive insulin therapy in the intensive care unit setting.

Background

Hypoglycemia is associated with increased mortality in critically ill patients. The impact of hypoglycemia on resource utilization has not been investigated. The objective of this investigation was to evaluate the association of hypoglycemia, defined as a blood glucose concentration (BG) < 70 mg/dL, and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) in three different cohorts of critically ill patients.

Methods

This is a retrospective investigation of prospectively collected data, including patients from two large observational cohorts: 3,263 patients admitted to Stamford Hospital (ST) and 2,063 patients admitted to three institutions in The Netherlands (NL) as well as 914 patients from the GLUCONTROL trial (GL), a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial of intensive insulin therapy.

Results

Patients with hypoglycemia were more likely to be diabetic, had higher APACHE II scores, and higher mortality than did patients without hypoglycemia. Patients with hypoglycemia had longer ICU LOS (median [interquartile range]) in ST (3.0 [1.4-7.1] vs. 1.2 [0.8-2.3] days, P < 0.0001), NL (5.2 [2.6-10.3] vs. 2.0 [1.3-3.2] days, P < 0.0001), and GL (9 [5-17] vs. 5 [3-9] days, P < 0.0001). For the entire cohort of 6,240 patients ICU LOS was 1.8 (1.0-3.3) days for those without hypoglycemia and 3.0 (1.5-6.7) days for those with a single episode of hypoglycemia (P < 0.0001). This was a consistent finding even when patients were stratified by severity of illness or survivor status. There was a strong positive correlation between the number of episodes of hypoglycemia and ICU LOS among all three cohorts.

Conclusions

This multicenter international investigation demonstrated that hypoglycemia was consistently associated with significantly higher ICU LOS in heterogeneous cohorts of critically ill patients, independently of severity of illness and survivor status. More effective methods to prevent hypoglycemia in these patients may positively impact their cost of care.

Introduction

Severe hypoglycemia (blood glucose concentration (BG) < 40 mg/dL) is independently associated with an increased risk of mortality in critically ill patients. The association of milder hypoglycemia (BG < 70 mg/dL) with mortality is less clear.

Methods

Prospectively collected data from two observational cohorts in the USA and in The Netherlands, and from the prospective GLUCONTROL trial were analyzed. Hospital mortality was the primary endpoint.

Results

We analyzed data from 6,240 patients: 3,263 admitted to Stamford Hospital (ST), 2,063 admitted to three institutions in The Netherlands (NL) and 914 who participated in the GLUCONTROL trial (GL). The percentage of patients with hypoglycemia varied from 18% to 65% among the different cohorts. Patients with hypoglycemia experienced higher mortality than did those without hypoglycemia even after stratification by severity of illness, diagnostic category, diabetic status, mean BG during intensive care unit (ICU) admission and coefficient of variation (CV) as a reflection of glycemic variability. The relative risk (RR, 95% confidence interval) of mortality associated with minimum BG < 40, 40 to 54 and 55 to 69 mg/dL compared to patients with minimum BG 80 to 109 mg/dL was 3.55 (3.02 to 4.17), 2.70 (2.31 to 3.14) and 2.18 (1.87 to 2.53), respectively (all P < 0.0001). The RR of mortality associated with any hypoglycemia < 70 mg/dL was 3.28 (2.78 to 3.87) (P < 0.0001), 1.30 (1.12 to 1.50) (P = 0.0005) and 2.11 (1.62 to 2.74) (P < 0.0001) for the ST, NL and GL cohorts, respectively. Multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that minimum BG < 70 mg/dL, 40 to 69 mg/dL and < 40 mg/dL were independently associated with increased risk of mortality for the entire cohort of 6,240 patients (odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval (CI)) 1.78 (1.39 to 2.27) P < 0.0001), 1.29 (1.11 to 1.51) P = 0.0011 and 1.87 (1.46 to 2.40) P < 0.0001) respectively.

Conclusions

Mild hypoglycemia was associated with a significantly increased risk of mortality in an international cohort of critically ill patients. Efforts to reduce the occurrence of hypoglycemia in critically ill patients may reduce mortality

Background

Glycemic variability (GV) has recently been associated with mortality in critically ill patients. The impact of diabetes or its absence on GV as a risk factor for mortality is unknown.

Methods

A total of 4084 adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients admitted between October 15, 1999, and June 30, 2009, with at least three central laboratory measurements of venous glucose samples during ICU stay were studied retrospectively. The patients were analyzed according to treatment era and presence or absence of diabetes: 1460 admitted before February 1, 2003, when there was no specific treatment protocol for hyperglycemia (“PRE”) and 2624 patients admitted after a glycemic control protocol was instituted (“GC”). 3142 were patients without diabetes (“NON”), and 942 were patients with diabetes (“DM”). The coefficient of variation (CV) [standard deviation (SD)/mean glucose level (MGL)] of each patient was used as a measure of GV. Patients were grouped by MGL (mg/dl) during ICU stay (70–99, 100–119, 120–139, 140–179, and 180+) as well as by CV (<15%, 15–30%, 30–50%, and 50%+).

Results

Patients with diabetes had higher MGL, SD, and CV than did NON (p < .0001 for all comparisons). Mean glucose level was lower among both GC groups compared to their corresponding PRE groups (p < .0001), but CV did not change significantly between eras. Multivariable logistic regression analysis demonstrated that low CV was independently associated with decreased risk of mortality and high CV was independently associated with increased risk of mortality among NON PRE and GC patients, even after exclusion of patients with severe (<40 mg/dl) or moderate (40–59 mg/dl) hypoglycemia. There was no association between CV and mortality among DM using the same multivariable model. Mortality among NON from the entire cohort, with MGL 70–99 mg/dl during ICU stay, was 10.2% for patients with CV < 15% versus 58.3% for those with CV 50%+; for NON with MGL 100–119 mg/dl, corresponding rates were 10.6% and 55.6%.

Conclusions

Low GV during ICU stay was associated with increased survival among NON, and high GV was associated with increased mortality, even after adjustment for severity of illness. There was no independent association of GV with mortality among DM. Attempts to minimize GV may have a significant beneficial impact on outcomes of critically ill patients without diabetes.

The present commentary provides a brief overview of the evolving literature on glycemic management in critically ill patients. Recent interventional studies have been plagued by high rates of severe hypoglycemia among patients, particularly those with sepsis. The investigation by Waeschle and colleagues adds to our knowledge about the relationship between the severity of sepsis and glycemic dysregulation. The severity of sepsis is shown to correlate with the risk of sustaining hyperglycemia as well as critical hypoglycemia.

The impressive benefits related to the use of tight glucose control by intensive insulin therapy have not been reproduced until now in multicenter large-scale prospective randomized trials. Although the reasons for these failures are not entirely clear, we suggest the use of a stepwise approach – Safe, Effective Glucose Control – that will essentially target an intermediate blood glucose level. As compared with genuine tight glucose control, Safe, Effective Glucose Control – already used in many intensive care units worldwide – is intended to decrease the rate of hypoglycemia and the workload, while reducing the adverse effects of severe hyperglycemia.