Intravenous glucose-insulin-potassium during off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery does not reduce myocardial injury

Cardioprotective Effects of Glucose-Insulin-Potassium Infusion in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The infusion of glucose-insulin-potassium (GIK) has yielded conflicting results in terms of cardioprotective effects. We conducted a meta-analysis to examine the impact of perioperative GIK infusion in early outcome after cardiac surgery. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were eligible if they examined the efficacy of GIK infusion in adults undergoing cardiac surgery. The main study endpoint was postoperative myocardial infarction (MI) and secondary outcomes were hemodynamics, any complications and hospital resources utilization. Subgroup analyses explored the impact of the type of surgery, GIK composition and timing of administration. Odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated with a random-effects model. Fifty-three studies (n=6129) met the inclusion criteria. Perioperative GIK infusion was effective in reducing MI (k=32 OR 0.66[0.48, 0.89] P=0.0069), acute kidney injury (k=7 OR 0.57[0.4, 0.82] P=0.0023) and hospital length of stay (k=19 MD -0.89[-1.63, -0.16] days P=0.0175). Postoperatively, the GIK-treated group presented higher cardiac index (k=14 MD 0.43[0.29, 0.57] L/min P<0.0001) and lesser hyperglycemia (k=20 MD -30[-47, -13] mg/dL P=0.0005) than in the usual care group. The GIK-associated protection for MI was effective when insulin infusion rate exceeded 2 mUI/kg/min and after coronary artery bypass surgery. Certainty of evidence was low given imprecision of the effect estimate, heterogeneity in outcome definition and risk of bias. Perioperative GIK infusion is associated with improved early outcome and reduced hospital resource utilization after cardiac surgery. Supporting evidence is heterogenous and further research is needed to standardize the optimal timing and composition of GIK solutions.

Hyperinsulinemic Normoglycemia during Cardiac Surgery Reduces a Composite of 30-day Mortality and Serious In-hospital Complications: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Hyperinsulinemic normoglycemia augments myocardial glucose uptake and utilization. We tested the hypothesis that hyperinsulinemic normoglycemia reduces 30-day mortality and morbidity after cardiac surgery.

METHODS

This dual-center, parallel-group, superiority trial randomized cardiac surgical patients between August 2007 and March 2015 at the Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, and Royal Victoria Hospital, Montreal, Canada, to intraoperative glycemic management with (1) hyperinsulinemic normoglycemia, a fixed high-dose insulin and concomitant variable glucose infusion titrated to glucose concentrations of 80 to 110 mg · dl; or (2) standard glycemic management, low-dose insulin infusion targeting glucose greater than 150 mg · dl. The primary outcome was a composite of 30-day mortality, mechanical circulatory support, infection, renal or neurologic morbidity. Interim analyses were planned at each 12.5% enrollment of a maximum 2,790 patients.

RESULTS

At the third interim analysis (n = 1,439; hyperinsulinemic normoglycemia, 709, standard glycemic management, 730; 52% of planned maximum), the efficacy boundary was crossed and study stopped per protocol. Time-weighted average glucose concentration (means ± SDs) with hyperinsulinemic normoglycemia was 108 ± 20 versus 150 ± 33 mg · dl with standard glycemic management, P < 0.001. At least one component of the composite outcome occurred in 49 (6.9%) patients receiving hyperinsulinemic normoglycemia versus 82 (11.2%) receiving standard glucose management (P < efficacy boundary 0.0085); estimated relative risk (95% interim-adjusted CI) 0.62 (0.39 to 0.97), P = 0.0043. There was a treatment-by-site interaction (P = 0.063); relative risk for the composite outcome was 0.49 (0.26 to 0.91, P = 0.0007, n = 921) at Royal Victoria Hospital, but 0.96 (0.41 to 2.24, P = 0.89, n = 518) at the Cleveland Clinic. Severe hypoglycemia (less than 40 mg · dl) occurred in 6 (0.9%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative hyperinsulinemic normoglycemia reduced mortality and morbidity after cardiac surgery. Providing exogenous glucose while targeting normoglycemia may be preferable to simply normalizing glucose concentrations.

Hyperinsulinemic Normoglycemia Does Not Meaningfully Improve Myocardial Performance during Cardiac Surgery: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Glucose-insulin-potassium (GIK) administration during cardiac surgery inconsistently improves myocardial function, perhaps because hyperglycemia negates the beneficial effects of GIK. The hyperinsulinemic normoglycemic clamp (HNC) technique may better enhance the myocardial benefits of GIK. The authors extended previous GIK investigations by (1) targeting normoglycemia while administering a GIK infusion (HNC); (2) using improved echocardiographic measures of myocardial deformation, specifically myocardial longitudinal strain and strain rate; and (3) assessing the activation of glucose metabolic pathways.

METHODS

A total of 100 patients having aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis were randomly assigned to HNC (high-dose insulin with concomitant glucose infusion titrated to normoglycemia) versus standard therapy (insulin treatment if glucose >150 mg/dl). The primary outcomes were left ventricular longitudinal strain and strain rate, assessed using speckle-tracking echocardiography. Right atrial tissue was analyzed for activation of glycolysis/pyruvate oxidation and alternative metabolic pathways.

RESULTS

Time-weighted mean glucose concentrations were lower with HNC (127 ± 19 mg/dl) than standard care (177 ± 41 mg/dl; P < 0.001). Echocardiographic data were adequate in 72 patients for strain analysis and 67 patients for strain rate analysis. HNC did not improve myocardial strain, with an HNC minus standard therapy difference of -1.2% (97.5% CI, -2.9 to 0.5%; P = 0.11). Strain rate was significantly better, but by a clinically unimportant amount: -0.16 s (-0.30 to -0.03 s; P = 0.007). There was no evidence of increased glycolytic, pyruvate oxidation, or hexosamine biosynthetic pathway activation in right atrial samples (HNC, n = 20; standard therapy, 22).

CONCLUSION

Administration of glucose and insulin while targeting normoglycemia during aortic valve replacement did not meaningfully improve myocardial function.

Perioperative glycaemic control for diabetic patients undergoing surgery

BACKGROUND

Patients with diabetes mellitus are at increased risk of postoperative complications. Data from randomised clinical trials and meta-analyses point to a potential benefit of intensive glycaemic control, targeting near-normal blood glucose, in patients with hyperglycaemia (with and without diabetes mellitus) being submitted to surgical procedures. However, there is limited evidence concerning this question in patients with diabetes mellitus undergoing surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of perioperative glycaemic control for diabetic patients undergoing surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

Trials were obtained from searches of The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL and ISIS (all up to February 2012).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled clinical trials that prespecified different targets of perioperative glycaemic control (intensive versus conventional or standard care)

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We summarised studies using meta-analysis or descriptive methods.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve trials randomised 694 diabetic participants to intensive control and 709 diabetic participants to conventional glycaemic control. The duration of the intervention ranged from just the duration of the surgical procedure up to 90 days. The number of participants ranged from 13 to 421, and the mean age was 64 years. Comparison of intensive with conventional glycaemic control demonstrated the following results for our predefined primary outcomes: analysis restricted to studies with low or unclear detection or attrition bias for infectious complications showed a risk ratio (RR) of 0.46 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 1.18), P = 0.11, 627 participants, eight trials, moderate quality of the evidence (grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation - (GRADE)). Evaluation of death from any cause revealed a RR of 1.19 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.59), P = 0.24, 1365 participants, 11 trials, high quality of the evidence (GRADE).On the basis of a posthoc analysis, there is the hypothesis that intensive glycaemic control may increase the risk of hypoglycaemic episodes if longer-term outcome measures are analysed (RR 6.92, 95% CI 2.04 to 23.41), P = 0.002, 724 patients, three trials, low quality of the evidence (GRADE). Analysis of our predefined secondary outcomes revealed the following findings: cardiovascular events had a RR of 1.03 (95% CI 0.21 to 5.13), P = 0.97, 682 participants, six trials, moderate quality of the evidence (GRADE) when comparing the two treatment modalities; and renal failure also did not show significant differences between intensive and regular glucose control (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.08), P = 0.09, 434 participants, two trials, moderate quality of the evidence (GRADE). We did not meta-analyse length of hospital stay and intensive care unit (ICU) stay due to substantial unexplained heterogeneity. Mean differences between intensive and regular glucose control groups ranged from -1.7 days to 2.1 days for ICU stay and between -8 days to 3.7 days for hospital stay (moderate quality of the evidence (GRADE)). One trial assessed health-related quality of life in 12/37 (32.4%) of participants in the intervention group and 13/44 (29.5%) of participants in the control group, and did not show an important difference (low quality of the evidence (GRADE)) in the measured physical health composite score of the short-form 12-item health survey (SF-12). None of the trials examined the effects of the interventions in terms of costs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The included trials did not demonstrate significant differences for most of the outcomes when targeting intensive perioperative glycaemic control compared with conventional glycaemic control in patients with diabetes mellitus. However, posthoc analysis indicated that intensive glycaemic control was associated with an increased number of patients experiencing hypoglycaemic episodes. Intensive glycaemic control protocols with near-normal blood glucose targets for patients with diabetes mellitus undergoing surgical procedures are currently not supported by an adequate scientific basis. We suggest that insulin treatment regimens, patient- and health-system relevant outcomes, and time points for outcome measures should be defined in a thorough and uniform way in future studies.