• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

严重颅脑损伤患者强化与常规血糖控制的比较:来自 NICE-SUGAR 研究的亚组患者的长期随访。

Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients with traumatic brain injury: long-term follow-up of a subgroup of patients from the NICE-SUGAR study.

出版信息

Intensive Care Med. 2015 Jun;41(6):1037-47. doi: 10.1007/s00134-015-3757-6. Epub 2015 Jun 19.

DOI:10.1007/s00134-015-3757-6
PMID:26088909
Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the effect of intensive versus conventional blood glucose control in patients with traumatic brain injury.

METHODS

In a large international randomized trial patients were randomly assigned to a target blood glucose (BG) range of either 4.5-6.0 mmol/L (intensive control) or <10 mmol/L (conventional control). Patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) were identified at randomization and data were collected to examine the extended Glasgow outcome score (includes mortality) at 24 months.

RESULTS

Of the 6104 randomized patients, 391 satisfied diagnostic criteria for TBI; 203 (51.9%) were assigned to intensive and 188 (48.1%) to conventional control; the primary outcome was available for 166 (81.8%) and 149 (79.3%) patients, respectively. The two groups had similar baseline characteristics. At 2 years 98 (58.7%) patients in the intensive group and 79 (53.0%) in the conventional group had a favorable neurological outcome (odds ratio [OR] 1.26, 95% CI 0.81-1.97; P = 0.3); 35 patients (20.9%) in the intensive group and 34 (22.8%) in the conventional group had died (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.53-1.53; P = 0.7); moderate hypoglycemia (BG 2.3-3.9 mmol/L; 41-70 mg/dL) occurred in 160/202 (79.2%) and 17/188 (9.0%), respectively (OR 38.3, 95% CI 21.0-70.1; P < 0.0001); severe hypoglycemia (BG ≤ 2.2 mmol/L; ≤40 mg/dL) in 10 (4.9%) and 0 (0.0%), respectively (OR 20.5 95% CI 1.2-351.6, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Although patients with traumatic brain injury randomly assigned to intensive compared to conventional glucose control experienced moderate and severe hypoglycemia more frequently, we found no significant difference in clinically important outcomes.

摘要

目的

比较强化血糖控制与常规血糖控制对创伤性脑损伤患者的影响。

方法

在一项大型国际随机试验中,患者被随机分配到血糖目标范围为 4.5-6.0mmol/L(强化控制)或 <10mmol/L(常规控制)。在随机分组时确定了创伤性脑损伤(TBI)患者,并收集数据以检查 24 个月时的扩展格拉斯哥结局评分(包括死亡率)。

结果

在 6104 名随机患者中,391 名符合 TBI 诊断标准;203 名(51.9%)被分配到强化组,188 名(48.1%)被分配到常规组;主要结局在 166 名(81.8%)和 149 名(79.3%)患者中可用。两组基线特征相似。在 2 年时,强化组 98 名(58.7%)患者和常规组 79 名(53.0%)患者有良好的神经功能结局(优势比[OR]1.26,95%置信区间[CI]0.81-1.97;P=0.3);强化组 35 名(20.9%)患者和常规组 34 名(22.8%)患者死亡(OR 0.90,95%CI0.53-1.53;P=0.7);中度低血糖(血糖 2.3-3.9mmol/L;41-70mg/dL)分别发生在 160/202(79.2%)和 17/188(9.0%)患者中(OR 38.3,95%CI21.0-70.1;P<0.0001);严重低血糖(血糖≤2.2mmol/L;≤40mg/dL)分别发生在 10 名(4.9%)和 0 名(0.0%)患者中(OR 20.5,95%CI1.2-351.6,P=0.003)。

结论

尽管与常规血糖控制相比,随机分配到强化血糖控制的创伤性脑损伤患者经历中度和重度低血糖的频率更高,但我们没有发现临床重要结局的显著差异。

相似文献

1
Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients with traumatic brain injury: long-term follow-up of a subgroup of patients from the NICE-SUGAR study.严重颅脑损伤患者强化与常规血糖控制的比较:来自 NICE-SUGAR 研究的亚组患者的长期随访。
Intensive Care Med. 2015 Jun;41(6):1037-47. doi: 10.1007/s00134-015-3757-6. Epub 2015 Jun 19.
2
Increased hypoglycemia associated with renal failure during continuous intravenous insulin infusion and specialized nutritional support.连续性静脉输注胰岛素和专门的营养支持期间与肾衰竭相关的低血糖增加。
Nutrition. 2011 Jul-Aug;27(7-8):766-72. doi: 10.1016/j.nut.2010.08.009. Epub 2010 Oct 25.
3
Improved safety with intravenous insulin therapy for critically ill patients with renal failure.静脉内胰岛素治疗肾衰竭危重症患者的安全性提高。
Nutrition. 2014 May;30(5):557-62. doi: 10.1016/j.nut.2013.10.010. Epub 2013 Oct 22.
4
Intensive insulin therapy on infection rate, days in NICU, in-hospital mortality and neurological outcome in severe traumatic brain injury patients: a randomized controlled trial.强化胰岛素治疗对重度创伤性脑损伤患者感染率、新生儿重症监护病房住院天数、院内死亡率及神经学转归的影响:一项随机对照试验
Int J Nurs Stud. 2009 Jun;46(6):753-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.01.004. Epub 2009 Feb 20.
5
Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients.危重症患者强化血糖控制与常规血糖控制的比较
N Engl J Med. 2009 Mar 26;360(13):1283-97. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0810625. Epub 2009 Mar 24.
6
[The optimal blood glucose target in critically ill patient: comparison of two intensive insulin therapy protocols].[重症患者的最佳血糖目标:两种强化胰岛素治疗方案的比较]
Med Clin (Barc). 2014 Mar 4;142(5):192-9. doi: 10.1016/j.medcli.2012.11.032. Epub 2013 Mar 13.
7
Hyperglycemia: an independent risk factor for poor outcome in children with traumatic brain injury*.高血糖:创伤性脑损伤患儿预后不良的独立危险因素*
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2014 Sep;15(7):623-31. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000000170.
8
Intensive versus modified conventional control of blood glucose level in medical intensive care patients: a pilot study.医学重症监护患者血糖水平强化控制与改良常规控制的比较:一项初步研究。
Am J Crit Care. 2005 Sep;14(5):370-6.
9
Intensive insulin therapy after severe traumatic brain injury: a randomized clinical trial.重度创伤性脑损伤后的强化胰岛素治疗:一项随机临床试验。
Neurocrit Care. 2008;9(2):159-66. doi: 10.1007/s12028-008-9084-9.
10
Stress insulin resistance is a marker for mortality in traumatic brain injury.应激性胰岛素抵抗是创伤性脑损伤患者死亡率的一个标志物。
J Trauma. 2009 Jan;66(1):145-51; discussion 151-3. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181938c5e.

引用本文的文献

1
Predictive performance of stress hyperglycemia ratio for poor prognosis in critically ill patients: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis.应激性高血糖比值对危重症患者预后不良的预测性能:一项系统评价和剂量反应荟萃分析
Eur J Med Res. 2025 Jul 11;30(1):613. doi: 10.1186/s40001-025-02868-x.
2
Stress hyperglycemia ratio as an independent predictor of acute kidney injury in critically ill patients with acute myocardial infarction: a retrospective U.S. cohort study.应激性高血糖比值作为急性心肌梗死重症患者急性肾损伤的独立预测指标:一项美国回顾性队列研究。
Ren Fail. 2025 Dec;47(1):2471018. doi: 10.1080/0886022X.2025.2471018. Epub 2025 Feb 26.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Effects of tight computerized glucose control on neurological outcome in severely brain injured patients: a multicenter sub-group analysis of the randomized-controlled open-label CGAO-REA study.严格的计算机化血糖控制对重型颅脑损伤患者神经功能结局的影响:随机对照开放标签CGAO-REA研究的多中心亚组分析
Crit Care. 2014 Sep 5;18(5):498. doi: 10.1186/s13054-014-0498-9.
2
Tight computerized versus conventional glucose control in the ICU: a randomized controlled trial.ICU 中强化计算机控制与常规血糖控制的随机对照试验。
Intensive Care Med. 2014 Feb;40(2):171-181. doi: 10.1007/s00134-013-3189-0. Epub 2014 Jan 14.
3
Optimal glycemic control in neurocritical care patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Association of Glycemic Variability with Outcomes in Non-diabetic Sepsis Patients: A Prospective Observational Study.
血糖变异性与非糖尿病脓毒症患者预后的相关性:一项前瞻性观察性研究。
Indian J Crit Care Med. 2025 Jan;29(1):27-35. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24873. Epub 2024 Dec 30.
4
Clinical Management in Traumatic Brain Injury.创伤性脑损伤的临床管理
Biomedicines. 2024 Apr 2;12(4):781. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines12040781.
5
Cerebral Glucose Metabolism following TBI: Changes in Plasma Glucose, Glucose Transport and Alternative Pathways of Glycolysis-A Translational Narrative Review.创伤性脑损伤后的脑葡萄糖代谢:血浆葡萄糖、葡萄糖转运及糖酵解替代途径的变化——一项转化性叙述性综述
Int J Mol Sci. 2024 Feb 21;25(5):2513. doi: 10.3390/ijms25052513.
6
Physiological trajectories after traumatic brain injury: markers or makers of disease?创伤性脑损伤后的生理轨迹:疾病的标志物还是制造者?
Lancet Neurol. 2024 Jan;23(1):7-9. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(23)00428-3. Epub 2023 Nov 14.
7
Expert consensus on the glycemic management of critically ill patients.危重症患者血糖管理专家共识
J Intensive Med. 2022 Jul 8;2(3):131-145. doi: 10.1016/j.jointm.2022.06.001. eCollection 2022 Jul.
8
Nutrition Management in Patients With Traumatic Brain Injury: A Narrative Review.创伤性脑损伤患者的营养管理:一项叙述性综述。
Brain Neurorehabil. 2022 Mar 28;15(1):e4. doi: 10.12786/bn.2022.15.e4. eCollection 2022 Mar.
9
Kidney Dysfunction After Traumatic Brain Injury: Pathophysiology and General Management.颅脑创伤后肾功能障碍:病理生理学与一般处理。
Neurocrit Care. 2023 Apr;38(2):504-516. doi: 10.1007/s12028-022-01630-z. Epub 2022 Nov 2.
10
Glycaemic control for patients with severe acute brain injury: Protocol for a systematic review.严重急性脑损伤患者的血糖控制:系统评价方案。
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2023 Feb;67(2):240-247. doi: 10.1111/aas.14166. Epub 2022 Nov 12.
神经重症监护患者的最佳血糖控制:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Crit Care. 2012 Oct 22;16(5):R203. doi: 10.1186/cc11812.
4
Hypoglycemia and risk of death in critically ill patients.危重症患者低血糖与死亡风险。
N Engl J Med. 2012 Sep 20;367(12):1108-18. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1204942.
5
Tight glycemic control increases metabolic distress in traumatic brain injury: a randomized controlled within-subjects trial.严格的血糖控制会增加创伤性脑损伤的代谢紊乱:一项随机对照的within-subjects 试验。
Crit Care Med. 2012 Jun;40(6):1923-9. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e31824e0fcc.
6
Standards of medical care in diabetes--2012.《糖尿病医疗护理标准——2012》
Diabetes Care. 2012 Jan;35 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S11-63. doi: 10.2337/dc12-s011.
7
Intensive insulin therapy in hospitalized patients: a systematic review.住院患者强化胰岛素治疗的系统评价。
Ann Intern Med. 2011 Feb 15;154(4):268-82. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-154-4-201102150-00008.
8
Use of intensive insulin therapy for the management of glycemic control in hospitalized patients: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians.使用强化胰岛素治疗以控制住院患者的血糖水平:美国医师学院的临床实践指南。
Ann Intern Med. 2011 Feb 15;154(4):260-7. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-154-4-201102150-00007.
9
Hypoglycemia is associated with intensive care unit mortality.低血糖与重症监护病房死亡率有关。
Crit Care Med. 2010 Jun;38(6):1430-4. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181de562c.
10
Hypoglycemia and outcome in critically ill patients.危重症患者的低血糖与预后。
Mayo Clin Proc. 2010 Mar;85(3):217-24. doi: 10.4065/mcp.2009.0394. Epub 2010 Feb 22.