Journal of diabetes science and technology
-
J Diabetes Sci Technol · Jul 2011
Clinical TrialA stepwise approach toward closed-loop blood glucose control for intensive care unit patients: results from a feasibility study in type 1 diabetic subjects using vascular microdialysis with infrared spectrometry and a model predictive control algorithm.
Glycemic control can reduce the mortality and morbidity of intensive care patients. The CLINICIP (closed-loop insulin infusion for critically ill patients) project aimed to develop a closed-loop control system for this patient group. Following a stepwise approach, we combined three independently tested subparts to form a semiautomatic closed-loop system and evaluated it with respect to safety and performance aspects by testing it in subjects with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in a first feasibility trial. ⋯ Data of the feasibility trial illustrate the device being effective in controlling glycemia in T1DM subjects. However, the monitoring part of the loop must be improved with respect to accuracy and precision before testing the system in the target population.
-
J Diabetes Sci Technol · Jul 2011
CommentPreanalytic and analytic accuracy: toward more realistic and meaningful self-monitoring of blood glucose submissions for regulatory approval.
Dr. Cembrowski provides an analysis of an article by Harrison and colleagues in this issue of Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology in which the authors describe the evaluation of a new device for self-monitoring of blood glucose, the Bayer CONTOUR® blood glucose monitoring system.
-
J Diabetes Sci Technol · Jul 2011
Characterizing blood glucose variability using new metrics with continuous glucose monitoring data.
Glycemic variability contributes to oxidative stress, which has been linked to the pathogenesis of the long-term complications of diabetes. Currently, the best metric for assessing glycemic variability is mean amplitude of glycemic excursion (MAGE); however, MAGE is not in routine clinical use. A glycemic variability metric in routine clinical use could potentially be an important measure of overall glucose control and a predictor of diabetes complication risk not detected by glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) levels. This study aimed to develop and evaluate new automated metrics of glycemic variability that could be routinely applied to continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data to assess and enhance glucose control. ⋯ We have developed a new automated metric to assess overall glycemic variability in people with diabetes using CGM, which could easily be incorporated into commercially available CGM software. Additional work to validate and refine this metric is underway. Future studies are planned to correlate the metric with both urinary 8-iso-prostaglandin F2 alpha excretion and serum 1,5-anhydroglucitol levels to see how well it identifies patients with high glycemic variability and increased markers of oxidative stress to assess risk for long-term complications of diabetes.
-
J Diabetes Sci Technol · May 2011
Effect of diabetes mellitus on outcomes of hyperglycemia in a mixed medical surgical intensive care unit.
Intensive insulin therapy and degree of glycemic control in critically ill patients remains controversial, particularly in patients with diabetes mellitus. We hypothesized that diabetic patients who achieved tight glucose control with continuous insulin therapy would have less morbidity and lower mortality than diabetic patients with uncontrolled blood glucose. ⋯ The results showed that a diagnosis of diabetes was not an independent predictor of mortality, and that diabetic patients who were uncontrolled did not have worse outcomes. Diabetic nonsurvivors were associated with a greater amount of hypoglycemic episodes, suggesting these patients may benefit from a more lenient blood glucose protocol.
-
J Diabetes Sci Technol · May 2011
Review Meta AnalysisIntensive insulin therapy in critically ill hospitalized patients: making it safe and effective.
Intensive insulin therapy (IIT) for hyperglycemia in critically ill patients has become a standard practice. Target levels for glycemia have fluctuated since 2000, as evidence initially indicated that tight glycemic control to so-called normoglycemia (80-110 mg/dl) leads to the lowest morbidity and mortality without hypoglycemic complications. Subsequent studies have demonstrated minimal clinical benefit combined with greater hypoglycemic morbidity and mortality with tight glycemic control in this population. ⋯ Three questions must be answered to understand the role of IIT for defined populations of critically ill patients: (1) How safe is IIT, with various glycemic targets, from the risk of hypoglycemia? (2) How tightly must BG be controlled for this approach to be effective? (3) What role does the accuracy of BG measurements play in affecting the safety of this method? For each state of impaired glucose regulation seen in the hospital, such as hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, or glucose variability, the benefits, risks, and goals of treatment, including IIT, might differ. With improved accuracy of BG monitors, IIT might be rendered even more intensive than at present, because patients will be less likely to receive inadvertent overdosages of insulin. Greater doses of insulin, but with dosing based on more accurate glucose levels, might result in less hypoglycemia, less hyperglycemia, and less glycemic variability.