Suppr超能文献

严格血糖控制的临床获益:关注重症监护病房。

Clinical benefits of tight glycaemic control: focus on the intensive care unit.

机构信息

Department and Laboratory of Intensive Care Medicine, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Herestraat 49, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium.

出版信息

Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2009 Dec;23(4):421-9. doi: 10.1016/j.bpa.2009.08.006.

Abstract

While stress hyperglycaemia has traditionally been regarded as an adaptive, beneficial response, it is clear that hyperglycaemia and hypoglycaemia are associated with increased risk of death in critically ill intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Recent studies on blood-glucose control failed to fully clarify whether this association is causal. Early proof-of-concept single-centre randomised controlled studies found that maintaining normoglycaemia by intensive insulin therapy, as compared with tolerating hyperglycaemia as an adaptive response, improved patient outcome. However, recent large multicentre studies VISEP, GLUCONTROL and NICE-SUGAR) could not confirm this survival benefit. Methodological disparity in the execution of the complex intervention of tight glycaemic control may have contributed significantly to the contradicting results. First, different target ranges for blood glucose were used in the control group of the GLUCONTROL and 'Normoglycemia in intensive care evaluation and survival using glucose algorithm' regulation' (NICE-SUGAR) studies. Second, problems to steer blood-glucose levels within target range in the intervention group resulted in a significant overlap of the treatment groups. Third, allowing inaccurate blood-glucose measurement devices, in combination with different blood sampling sites and types of infusion pumps, may have led to unnoticed swings in blood-glucose levels. Fourth, the level of expertise of the intensive care nurses with the therapy may have been variable due to low number of study patients per centre. Finally, the studies on tight blood-glucose control were done with vastly different nutritional and end-of-life strategies. The currently available studies do not allow to confidently recommend one optimal target for glucose in heterogeneous ICU patient groups and settings. Provided that adequate devices for blood-glucose measurement and insulin administration are available, together with an extensive experience of the nursing staff, blood-glucose levels should be controlled as close to normal as possible, without evoking unacceptable fluctuations and hypoglycaemia.

摘要

虽然应激性高血糖传统上被认为是一种适应性的有益反应,但高血糖和低血糖与重症监护病房(ICU)患者死亡风险增加明显相关。最近关于血糖控制的研究未能完全阐明这种关联是否具有因果关系。早期的概念验证性单中心随机对照研究发现,与耐受高血糖作为适应性反应相比,通过强化胰岛素治疗维持正常血糖水平可改善患者预后。然而,最近的大型多中心研究 VISEP、GLUCONTROL 和 NICE-SUGAR)无法证实这种生存获益。严格血糖控制这一复杂干预措施实施过程中的方法学差异可能是导致结果相互矛盾的重要原因。首先,GLUCONTROL 和“使用血糖算法评估重症监护中的血糖控制和生存率”(NICE-SUGAR)研究的对照组中使用了不同的血糖目标范围。其次,干预组中存在使血糖水平达到目标范围的问题,导致治疗组之间存在显著重叠。第三,允许不准确的血糖测量设备与不同的采血部位和输注泵类型结合使用,可能导致血糖水平出现未被察觉的波动。第四,由于每个中心的研究患者数量较少,重症监护护士的治疗专业水平可能存在差异。最后,关于严格血糖控制的研究采用了截然不同的营养和临终策略。目前的研究尚不能自信地推荐在异质 ICU 患者群体和环境中使用一种最佳的血糖目标。只要有足够的血糖测量和胰岛素给药设备,并具备丰富的护理人员经验,就应尽可能将血糖水平控制在接近正常的范围内,同时避免出现不可接受的波动和低血糖。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验