• Jared M Campbell, Natalia Adanichkin, Rochelle Kurmis, and Zachary Munn.
• The Joanna Briggs Institute, Faculty of Health Science, University of Adelaide, North Adelaide, 55 King William Street, 5006 South Australia, Australia. Electronic address: jared.campbell@adelaide.edu.au.
• Burns. 2018 Sep 1; 44 (6): 1377-1394.

AbstractThis systematic review investigated the effectiveness and safety of intensive insulin therapy (IIT), insulin secretagogues and sensitisers in burn patients. PubMed, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov and Cochrane central were searched from 1990 to 2016. Title/abstract screening, full-text review, critical appraisal and data extraction were carried out by two independent reviewers. Inclusion criteria were hospitalised burn patients, IIT, insulin sensitisers or secretagogues and the outcomes mortality, length of stay, resting energy expenditure, blood glucose, catabolism, or complications. We identified 594 potential studies of which 13 were included. Five studies investigated IIT in paediatric patients, 3 investigated IIT in adults and 5 investigated sensitisers or secretagogues. Glycaemic targets differed with age group - paediatric studies compared IIT to loose glycaemic control while adult studies compared IIT to more moderate control. Meta-analyses were limited by differences in outcome reporting, however mortality was increased in children by loose glycaemic control (OR=3.78, 95%CI 1.19-12.02) but not significantly affected in adults by moderate compared to tight control. Meta-analyses could not be performed for sensitisers or secretagogues. These findings support recommendations that moderate insulin administration (130-150mg/dL) is the prudent approach in burn patients. The evidence is relatively sparse and further research is warranted.Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd and ISBI. All rights reserved.

36 keywords...

hide…