2
|
Poole AP, Finnis ME, Anstey J, Bellomo R, Bihari S, Birardar V, Doherty S, Eastwood G, Finfer S, French CJ, Heller S, Horowitz M, Kar P, Kruger PS, Maiden MJ, Mårtensson J, McArthur CJ, McGuinness SP, Secombe PJ, Tobin AE, Udy AA, Young PJ, Deane AM. The Effect of a Liberal Approach to Glucose Control in Critically Ill Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A multicenter, parallel-group, open-label, randomized clinical trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2022; 206:874-882. [PMID: 35608484 DOI: 10.1164/rccm.202202-0329oc] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Rationale Blood glucose concentrations affect outcomes in critically ill patients but the optimal target blood glucose range in those with type 2 diabetes is unknown. Objective To evaluate the effects of a 'liberal' approach to targeted blood glucose range during intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Methods This mutlicenter, parallel-group, open-label, randomized clinical trial included 419 adult patients with type 2 diabetes expected to be in the ICU on at least three consecutive days. In the intervention group intravenous insulin was commenced at a blood glucose >252 mg/dL and titrated to a target range of 180 to 252 mg/dL. In the comparator group insulin was commenced at a blood glucose >180 mg/dL and titrated to a target range of 108 to 180 mg/dL. The primary outcome was incident hypoglycemia (<72 mg/dL). Secondary outcomes included glucose metrics and clinical outcomes. Main Results At least one episode of hypoglycemia occurred in 10 of 210 (5%) patients assigned the intervention and 38 of 209 (18%) patients assigned the comparator (incident rate ratio: 0.21 (95% CI, 0.09 to 0.49); P<0.001). Those assigned the intervention had greater blood glucose concentrations (daily mean, minimum, maximum), less glucose variability and less relative hypoglycaemia (P<0.001 for all comparisons). By day 90, 62 of 210 (29.5%) in the intervention and 52 of 209 (24.9%) in the comparator group had died (absolute difference 4.6 percentage points (95%CI, -3.9 to 13.2%); P=0.29). Conclusions A liberal approach to blood glucose targets reduced incident hypoglycemia but did not improve patient-centered outcomes. Clinical trial registration available at www.anzctr.org.au, ID: ACTRN12616001135404.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexis P Poole
- The University of Adelaide Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, 242032, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.,Intensive Care Unit, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.,Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Mark E Finnis
- Royal Adelaide Hospital, Department of Critical Care Services, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.,University of Adelaide, Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - James Anstey
- Saint Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, 60078, Department of Intensive Care, Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia
| | | | - Shailesh Bihari
- Flinders Medical Centre and Flinders University, Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Bedford park, South Australia, Australia
| | - Vishwanath Birardar
- The University of Adelaide Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, 242032, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.,Lyell McEwin Hospital, 3187, Intensive Care Unit, Elizabeth Vale, South Australia, Australia
| | - Sarah Doherty
- Department of Intensive Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Glenn Eastwood
- Austin hospital, Intensive care unit, Heidelgerg, Victoria, Australia
| | - Simon Finfer
- University of Sydney, Intensive Care, St. Leonards, New South Wales, Australia
| | - Craig J French
- Western Health, Victoria, Intensive Care Unit, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Simon Heller
- Clinical Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
| | - Michael Horowitz
- The University of Adelaide Adelaide Medical School, 110466, Centre of Research Excellence in Translating Nutritional Science to Good Health, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Palash Kar
- The University of Adelaide Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, 242032, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.,Intensive Care Unit, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Peter S Kruger
- Princess Alexandra Hospital, Intensive Care Unit, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.,University of Queensland, Critical Care, Endocrinology and Metabolism Research Unit, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
| | - Matthew J Maiden
- Royal Adelaide Hospital, Intensive Care Unit, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.,University of Adelaide, Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
| | - Johan Mårtensson
- Karolinska Institutet Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, 111126, Stockholm, Sweden.,Karolinska University Hospital, 59562, Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care, Stockholm, Sweden
| | | | - Shay P McGuinness
- Auckland District Health Board, Cardiothoracic and Vascular ICU, Aucklanad, New Zealand
| | - Paul J Secombe
- Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.,Department of Intensive Care, Alice Springs Hospital, Alice Springs, Australia
| | - Antony E Tobin
- The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Medical School, Department of Critical Care, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Department of Intensive Care, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Andrew A Udy
- Monash University, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
| | - Paul J Young
- Wellington Hospital, Intensive Care Unit, Wellington, New Zealand.,Medical Research Institute of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand
| | - Adam M Deane
- The University of Melbourne, 2281, Centre for Integrated Critical Care , Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Royal Melbourne Hospital, 90134, Intensive Care Unit, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.,Royal Melbourne Hospital, 90134, Department of Medicine, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia;
| | | |
Collapse
|
3
|
Poole AP, Finnis ME, Anstey J, Bellomo R, Bihari S, Biradar V, Doherty S, Eastwood G, Finfer S, French CJ, Ghosh A, Heller S, Horowitz M, Kar P, Kruger PS, Maiden MJ, Mårtensson J, McArthur CJ, McGuinness SP, Secombe PJ, Tobin AE, Udy AA, Young PJ, Deane AM. Study protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Liberal Glucose Control in Critically Ill Patients with Pre-existing Type 2 Diabetes (LUCID) trial. CRIT CARE RESUSC 2020; 22:133-141. [PMID: 32389105 PMCID: PMC10692470] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Contemporary glucose management of intensive care unit (ICU) patients with type 2 diabetes is based on trial data derived predominantly from patients without type 2 diabetes. This is despite the recognition that patients with type 2 diabetes may be relatively more tolerant of hyperglycaemia and more susceptible to hypoglycaemia. It is uncertain whether glucose targets should be more liberal in patients with type 2 diabetes. OBJECTIVE To detail the protocol, analysis and reporting plans for a randomised clinical trial - the Liberal Glucose Control in Critically Ill Patients with Pre-existing Type 2 Diabetes (LUCID) trial - which will evaluate the risks and benefits of targeting a higher blood glucose range in patients with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION A multicentre, parallel group, open label phase 2B randomised controlled clinical trial of 450 critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes. Patients will be randomised 1:1 to liberal blood glucose (target 10.0-14.0 mmol/L) or usual care (target 6.0-10.0 mmol/L). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary endpoint is incident hypoglycaemia (< 4.0 mmol/L) during the study intervention. Secondary endpoints include biochemical and feasibility outcomes. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION The study protocol and statistical analysis plan described will delineate conduct and analysis of the trial, such that analytical and reporting bias are minimised. TRIAL REGISTRATION This trial has been registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN No. 12616001135404) and has been endorsed by the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexis P Poole
- Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia.
| | - Mark E Finnis
- Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| | - James Anstey
- Department of Intensive Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Rinaldo Bellomo
- Department of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Shailesh Bihari
- Department of Intensive and Critical Care Unit, Flinders Medical Centre, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| | - Vishwanath Biradar
- Department of Intensive Care, Lyell McEwin Hospital, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| | - Sarah Doherty
- Department of Intensive Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Glenn Eastwood
- Department of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Simon Finfer
- The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Craig J French
- Department of Intensive Care, Western Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Angaj Ghosh
- Intensive Care Unit, Northern Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Simon Heller
- Clinical Diabetes, Endocrinology and Metabolism, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
| | - Michael Horowitz
- Endocrine and Metabolic Unit, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| | - Palash Kar
- Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| | - Peter S Kruger
- Department of Intensive Care, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Matthew J Maiden
- Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA, Australia
| | - Johan Mårtensson
- Section of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, Department of Physiology and Pharmacology, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden
| | - Colin J McArthur
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Shay P McGuinness
- Cardiothoracic and Vascular Intensive Care and High Dependency Unit, Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Paul J Secombe
- Department of Intensive Care, Alice Springs Hospital, Alice Springs, NT, Australia
| | - Antony E Tobin
- Department of Intensive Care, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Andrew A Udy
- Department of Intensive Care, The Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Paul J Young
- Medical Research Institute of New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand
| | - Adam M Deane
- Department of Intensive Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Poole AP, Finnis ME, Anstey J, Bellomo R, Bihari S, Biradar V, Doherty S, Eastwood G, Finfer S, French CJ, Ghosh A, Heller S, Horowitz M, Kar P, Kruger PS, Maiden MJ, Mårtensson J, McArthur CJ, McGuinness SP, Secombe PJ, Tobin AE, Udy AA, Young PJ, Deane AM. Study protocol and statistical analysis plan for the Liberal Glucose Control in Critically Ill Patients with Pre-existing Type 2 Diabetes (LUCID) trial. CRIT CARE RESUSC 2020. [DOI: 10.51893/2020.2.oa3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Contemporary glucose management of intensive care unit (ICU) patients with type 2 diabetes is based on trial data derived predominantly from patients without type 2 diabetes. This is despite the recognition that patients with type 2 diabetes may be relatively more tolerant of hyperglycaemia and more susceptible to hypoglycaemia. It is uncertain whether glucose targets should be more liberal in patients with type 2 diabetes. OBJECTIVE: To detail the protocol, analysis and reporting plans for a randomised clinical trial — the Liberal Glucose Control in Critically Ill Patients with Pre-existing Type 2 Diabetes (LUCID) trial — which will evaluate the risks and benefits of targeting a higher blood glucose range in patients with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION: A multicentre, parallel group, open label phase 2B randomised controlled clinical trial of 450 critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes. Patients will be randomised 1:1 to liberal blood glucose (target 10.0–14.0 mmol/L) or usual care (target 6.0–10.0 mmol/L). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint is incident hypoglycaemia (< 4.0 mmol/L) during the study intervention. Secondary endpoints include biochemical and feasibility outcomes. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The study protocol and statistical analysis plan described will delineate conduct and analysis of the trial, such that analytical and reporting bias are minimised. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial has been registered on the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN No. 12616001135404) and has been endorsed by the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Society Clinical Trials Group.
Collapse
|
5
|
Poole AP, Anstey J, Bellomo R, Biradar V, Deane AM, Finfer SR, Finnis ME, French CJ, Kar P, Kruger PS, Maiden MJ, Mårtensson J, McArthur CJ, McGuinness SP, Secombe PJ, Tobin AE, Udy AA, Eastwood GM. Opinions and practices of blood glucose control in critically ill patients with pre-existing type 2 diabetes in Australian and New Zealand intensive care units. Aust Crit Care 2018; 32:361-365. [PMID: 30348487 DOI: 10.1016/j.aucc.2018.09.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/17/2018] [Revised: 09/05/2018] [Accepted: 09/05/2018] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Approximately 9000 patients with type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) in Australia and New Zealand annually. For these patients, recent exploratory data suggest that targeting a more liberal blood glucose range during ICU admission may be safe and potentially beneficial. However, the current approach to blood glucose management of patients with T2DM in Australia and New Zealand ICUs is not well described, and there is uncertainty about clinician equipoise for trials of liberal glycaemic control in these patients. AIM The aim is to describe self-reported blood glucose management in patients with T2DM by intensivists working in Australian and New Zealand ICUs and to establish whether equipoise exists for a trial of liberal versus standard glycaemic control in such patients. METHOD An online questionnaire of Australia and New Zealand intensivists conducted in July-September 2016. RESULTS Seventy-one intensivists responded. Forty-five (63%) used a basic nomogram to titrate insulin. Sixty-six (93%) reported that insulin was commenced at blood glucose concentrations >10 mmol/L and titrated to achieve a blood glucose concentration between 6.0 and 10.0 mmol/L. A majority of respondents (75%) indicated that there was insufficient evidence to define optimal blood glucose targets in patients with T2DM, and 59 (83%) were prepared to enrol such patients in a clinical trial to evaluate a more liberal approach. CONCLUSION A majority of respondents were uncertain about the optimal blood glucose target range for patients with T2DM and would enrol such patients in a comparative trial of conventional versus liberal blood glucose control.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexis P Poole
- Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, University of Adelaide, Australia; Department of Intensive Care, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Australia.
| | - James Anstey
- Department of Intensive Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Australia
| | | | | | - Adam M Deane
- Department of Intensive Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Australia
| | - Simon R Finfer
- The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia
| | - Mark E Finnis
- Department of Intensive Care, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Australia
| | | | - Palash Kar
- Discipline of Acute Care Medicine, University of Adelaide, Australia; Department of Intensive Care, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Australia
| | - Peter S Kruger
- Department of Intensive Care, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Australia; School of Medicine, University of Queensland, Australia
| | | | | | - Colin J McArthur
- Department of Critical Care Medicine, Auckland District Health Board, Australia
| | - Shay P McGuinness
- Cardiothoracic and Vascular Intensive Care and High Dependency Unit, Auckland District Health Board, Australia
| | - Paul J Secombe
- Department of Intensive Care, Alice Springs Hospital, Australia
| | - Antony E Tobin
- Department of Intensive Care, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Andrew A Udy
- Department of Intensive Care, The Alfred Hospital, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|