First pilot trial of the STAR-Liege protocol for tight glycemic control in critically ill patients

peer reviewe

Tight glycemic control in critical care - The leading role of insulin sensitivity and patient variability: A review and model-based analysis.

Tight glycemic control (TGC) has emerged as a major research focus in critical care due to its potential to simultaneously reduce both mortality and costs. However, repeating initial successful TGC trials that reduced mortality and other outcomes has proven difficult with more failures than successes. Hence, there has been growing debate over the necessity of TGC, its goals, the risk of severe hypoglycemia, and target cohorts. This paper provides a review of TGC via new analyses of data from several clinical trials, including SPRINT, Glucontrol and a recent NICU study. It thus provides both a review of the problem and major background factors driving it, as well as a novel model-based analysis designed to examine these dynamics from a new perspective. Using these clinical results and analysis, the goal is to develop new insights that shed greater light on the leading factors that make TGC difficult and inconsistent, as well as the requirements they thus impose on the design and implementation of TGC protocols. A model-based analysis of insulin sensitivity using data from three different critical care units, comprising over 75,000h of clinical data, is used to analyse variability in metabolic dynamics using a clinically validated model-based insulin sensitivity metric (S(I)). Variation in S(I) provides a new interpretation and explanation for the variable results seen (across cohorts and studies) in applying TGC. In particular, significant intra- and inter-patient variability in insulin resistance (1/S(I)) is seen be a major confounder that makes TGC difficult over diverse cohorts, yielding variable results over many published studies and protocols. Further factors that exacerbate this variability in glycemic outcome are found to include measurement frequency and whether a protocol is blind to carbohydrate administration

Early intervention with erythropoietin does not affect the outcome of acute kidney injury (the EARLYARF trial)

We performed a double-blind placebo-controlled trial to study whether early treatment with erythropoietin could prevent the development of acute kidney injury in patients in two general intensive care units. As a guide for choosing the patients for treatment we measured urinary levels of two biomarkers, the proximal tubular brush border enzymes &gamma;-glutamyl transpeptidase and alkaline phosphatase. Randomization to either placebo or two doses of erythropoietin was triggered by an increase in the biomarker concentration product to levels above 46.3, with a primary outcome of relative average plasma creatinine increase from baseline over 4 to 7 days. Of 529 patients, 162 were randomized within an average of 3.5&thinsp;h of a positive sample. There was no difference in the incidence of erythropoietin-specific adverse events or in the primary outcome between the placebo and treatment groups. The triggering biomarker concentration product selected patients with more severe illness and at greater risk of acute kidney injury, dialysis, or death; however, the marker elevations were transient. Early intervention with high-dose erythropoietin was safe but did not alter the outcome. Although these two urine biomarkers facilitated our early intervention, their transient increase compromised effective triaging. Further, our study showed that a composite of these two biomarkers was insufficient for risk stratification in a patient population with a heterogeneous onset of injury.<br /