Murphy Claire V, Saliba Lina, MacDermott Jennifer, Soe Kyaw, Dungan Kathleen M
Department of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center (Dr Murphy), Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism, The Ohio State University (Dr Dungan), and Riverside Methodist Hospital (Ms MacDermott), Columbus, Ohio; Department of Pharmacy, Yale New Haven Hospital, New Haven, Connecticut (Dr Saliba); and Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Endocrinology, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center (Dr Soe) and VA North Texas Healthcare System (Dr Soe), Dallas, Texas.
Crit Care Nurs Q. 2020 Jan/Mar;43(1):14-27. doi: 10.1097/CNQ.0000000000000288.
Hyperglycemia is a common phenomenon in critically ill patients, even in those without diabetes. Two landmark studies established the benefits of tight glucose control (blood glucose target 80-110 mg/dL) in surgical and medical patients. Since then, literature has consistently demonstrated that both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia are independently associated with increased morbidity and mortality in a variety of critically ill patients. However, tight glycemic control has subsequently come into question due to risks of hypoglycemia and increased mortality. More recently, strategies targeting euglycemia (blood glucose ≤180 mg/dL) have been associated with improved outcomes, although the risk of hypoglycemia remains. More complex targets (ie, glycemic variability and time within target glucose range) and the impact of individual patient characteristics (ie, diabetic status and prehospital glucose control) have more recently been shown to influence the relationship between glycemic control and outcomes in critically ill patients. Although our understanding has increased, the optimal glycemic target is still unclear and glucose management strategies may require adjustment for individual patient characteristics. As glucose management increases in complexity, we realize that traditional means of using meters and strips and paper insulin titration algorithms are potential limitations to our success. To achieve these complex goals for glycemic control, the use of continuous or near-continuous glucose monitoring combined with computerized insulin titration algorithms may be required. The purpose of this review is to discuss the evidence surrounding the various domains of glycemic control and the emerging data supporting the need for individualized glucose targets in critically ill patients.
高血糖在重症患者中很常见,即使是那些没有糖尿病的患者。两项具有里程碑意义的研究证实了严格血糖控制(血糖目标为80 - 110 mg/dL)对手术和内科患者的益处。从那时起,文献一直表明,高血糖和低血糖都与各类重症患者的发病率和死亡率增加独立相关。然而,由于低血糖风险和死亡率增加,严格血糖控制随后受到质疑。最近,针对血糖正常(血糖≤180 mg/dL)的策略与改善预后相关,尽管低血糖风险仍然存在。最近还显示,更复杂的目标(即血糖变异性和血糖目标范围内的时间)以及个体患者特征(即糖尿病状态和院前血糖控制)的影响会影响重症患者血糖控制与预后之间的关系。尽管我们的认识有所提高,但最佳血糖目标仍不明确,血糖管理策略可能需要根据个体患者特征进行调整。随着血糖管理的复杂性增加,我们意识到使用血糖仪、试纸和纸质胰岛素滴定算法等传统方法是我们取得成功的潜在限制。为了实现这些复杂的血糖控制目标,可能需要使用连续或近乎连续的血糖监测结合计算机化胰岛素滴定算法。本综述的目的是讨论血糖控制各个领域的相关证据以及支持重症患者个体化血糖目标必要性的新数据。