Inpatient Hypoglycemic Events in a Comparative Effectiveness Trial for Glycemic Control in a High-Risk Population

Objective: Inpatient hypoglycemia (glucose ≤70 mg/dL) is a limitation of intensive control with insulin. Causes of hypoglycemia were evaluated in a randomized controlled trial examining intensive glycemic control (IG, target 140 mg/dL) versus moderate glycemic control (MG, target 180 mg/dL) on post–liver transplant outcomes.Methods: Hypoglycemic episodes were reviewed by a multidisciplinary team to calculate and identify contributing pathophysiologic and operational factors. A subsequent subgroup case control (1:1) analysis (with/without) hypoglycemia was completed to further delineate factors. A total of 164 participants were enrolled, and 155 patients were examined in depth.Results: Overall, insulin-related hypoglycemia was experienced in 24 of 82 patients in IG (episodes: 20 drip, 36 subcutaneous [SQ]) and 4 of 82 in MG (episodes: 2 drip, 2 SQ). Most episodes occurred at night (41 of 60), with high insulin amounts (44 of 60), and during a protocol deviation (51 of 60). Compared to those without hypoglycemia (n = 127 vs. n = 28), hypoglycemic patients had significantly longer hospital stays (13.6 ± 12.6 days vs. 7.4 ± 6.1 days; P = .002), higher peak insulin drip rates (17.4 ± 10.3 U/h vs. 13.1 ± 9.9 U/h; P = .044), and higher peak insulin glargine doses (36.8 ± 21.4 U vs. 26.2 ± 24.3 U; P = .035). In the case-matched analysis (24 cases, 24 controls), those with insulin-related hypoglycemia had higher median peak insulin drip rates (17 U/h vs. 11 U/h; P = .04) and protocol deviations (92% vs. 50%; P = .004).Conclusion: Peak insulin requirements and protocol deviations were correlated with hypoglycemia.Abbreviations:DM = diabetes mellitusICU = intensive care unitIG = intensive glycemic controlMELD = Model for End-stage Liver DiseaseMG = moderate glycemic controlSQ = subcutaneous     

A Comparison of Twice-Daily Biphasic Insulin Aspart 70/30 and Once-Daily Insulin Glargine in Persons With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Inadequately Controlled on Basal Insulin and Oral Therapy: A Randomized,Open-Label Study

ObjectiveTo compare efficacy and safety of biphasic insulin aspart 70/30 (BIAsp 30) with insulin (glargine) in type 2 diabetic patients who were not maintaining glycemic control on basal insulin and oral antidiabetic drugs.MethodsIn a 24-week, open-label, parallel-group trial, type 2 diabetic patients who were not maintaining glycemic control on basal insulin (glargine or neutral protamine Hagedorn) + oral antidiabetic drugs were randomly assigned to twice-daily BIAsp 30 + metformin or oncedaily glargine + metformin + secretagogues (secretagogues were discontinued in the BIAsp 30 arm).ResultsOne hundred thirty-seven patients were randomly assigned to the BIAsp 30 group and 143 patients were randomly assigned to the glargine group. Of 280 patients randomized, 229 (81.8%) completed the study. End-of-trial hemoglobin A_1c reductions were − 1.3% (BIAsp 30) vs − 1.2% (glargine) (treatment difference: 95% confidence interval, − 0.06 [− 0.32 to 0.20]; P = .657). Of patients taking BIAsp 30, 27.3% reached a hemoglobin A_1c level < 7.0% compared with 22.0% of patients taking glargine (treatment difference: P = .388). Glucose increment averaged over 3 meals was lower in the BIAsp 30 arm (treatment difference: − 17.8 mg/dL, P = .001). Fasting plasma glucose reductions from baseline were − 13.8 mg/ dL (BIAsp 30) vs − 42.5 mg/dL (glargine) (P = .0002). Final minor hypoglycemia rate, insulin dose, and weight change were higher in the BIAsp 30 arm (6.5 vs 3.4 events/patient per year, P <.05; 1.19 vs 0.63 U/kg; and 3.1 vs 1.4 kg, P = .0004, respectively).ConclusionsDespite not receiving secretagogues, patients taking BIAsp 30 + metformin achieved similar hemoglobin A_1c levels and lower postprandial plasma glucose compared with those receiving glargine + metformin + secretagogues. The large improvement in the glargine group suggests the patients were not true basal failures at randomization. While switching to BIAsp 30 improves glycemic control in this patient population, remaining on basal insulin and optimizing the dose may be equally effective in the short term. (Endocr Pract. 2011;17:41-50)     

Basal-Bolus Regimen With Insulin Analogues Versus Human Insulin in Medical Patients with type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Latin America

Objective: Few randomized studies have focused on the optimal management of non–intensive care unit patients with type 2 diabetes in Latin America. We compared the safety and efficacy of a basal-bolus regimen with analogues and human insulins in general medicine patients admitted to a University Hospital in Asunción, Paraguay.Methods: In a prospective, open-label trial, we randomized 134 nonsurgical patients with blood glucose (BG) between 140 and 400 mg/dL to a basal-bolus regimen with glargine once daily and glulisine before meals (n = 66) or Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH) twice daily and regular insulin before meals (n = 68). Major outcomes included differences in daily BG levels and frequency of hypoglycemic events between treatment groups.Results: There were no differences in the mean daily BG (157 ± 37 mg/dL versus 158 ± 44 mg/dL; P = .90) or in the number of BG readings within target <140 mg/dL before meals (76% versus 74%) between the glargine/glulisine and NPH/regular regimens. The mean insulin dose in the glargine/glulisine group was 0.76 ± 0.3 units/kg/day (glargine, 22 ± 9 units/day; glulisine, 31 ± 12 units/day) and was not different compared with NPH/regular group (0.75 ± 0.3 units/kg/day [NPH, 28 ± 12 units/day; regular, 23 ± 9 units/day]). The overall prevalence of hypoglycemia (<70 mg/dL) was similar between patients treated with NPH/regular and glargine/glulisine (38% versus 35%; P = .68), but more patients treated with human insulin had severe (<40 mg/dL) hypoglycemia (7.6% versus 25%; P = .08). There were no differences in length of hospital stay or mortality between groups.Conclusion: The basal-bolus regimen with insulin analogues resulted in equivalent glycemic control and frequency of hypoglycemia compared to treatment with human insulin in hospitalized patients with diabetes.Abbreviations: BG = blood glucose BMI = body mass index HbA_1c = glycated hemoglobin NPH = Neutral Protamine Hagedorn T2D = type 2 diabetes     

Decreased Mortality with Tight Glycemic Control in Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Analysis in a Large Community Hospital System

ObjectiveTo measure the efficacy and possible adverse consequences of tight blood glucose (BG) control when compared to relaxed control.MethodsA retrospective, observational study was conducted at a community-based teaching hospital system among adult, nonmaternity hospitalized patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Tight glycemic control of BG was compared with less strict BG control, and the following outcome measurements were compared: BG, average length of stay (ALOS), severe hypoglycemia, and mortality.ResultsBetween 2008 and 2012, 18,919 patients were admitted to the ICU. The mortality rate was significantly lower (P = .0001) in patients with an average BG between 80 and 110 mg/dL (8%) and 111 and 140 mg/dL (9.4%) than in patients with average BG between 141 and 180 mg/dL (12.9%). Using tight glycemic control (80 to 110 mg/dL), the ALOS in the ICU decreased from 4 to 2.9 days (P < .0001) among all patients, and from 4.2 to 2.1 days (P < .0001) among patients who had undergone coronary artery bypass graft. Comparatively, the ALOS for the hospital decreased from 9.4 to 8 days. The incidence of severe hypoglycemia (BG < 40 mg/dL) was higher (P = .01) in the tight BG control group (4.78%) compared with the relaxed control group (3.5%). This rate was lower than in previously published studies that analyzed the use of tight control.ConclusionTight glycemic control using protocolbased insulin administration resulted in a decrease in mortality and ALOS among all patients in the ICU. The incidence of severe hypoglycemic episodes was slightly higher in the tightly controlled group but remained lower than in previously published studies. (Endocr Pract. 2014;20: 907-918)     

Improved Glycemic Control with Insulin Glargine Versus Pioglitazone as Add-On Therapy to Sulfonylurea or Metformin in Patients with Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

ObjectiveTo compare glycemic control with add-on insulin glargine versus pioglitazone treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes.MethodsThis 48-week, multicenter, parallel-group, open-label study randomized 389 adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (glycated hemoglobin A1c [A1C], 8.0% to 12.0%), despite ≥ 3 months of sulfonylurea or metformin monotherapy, to receive add-on therapy with insulin glargine or pioglitazone. Outcomes included A1C change from baseline to end point (primary), percentage of patients achieving A1C levels ≤ 7.0%, and changes from baseline in fasting plasma glucose, body mass index, weight, and serum lipids. The safety analysis included incidence of adverse events and rates of hypoglycemia.ResultsAt end point, insulin glargine yielded a significantly greater reduction in A1C in comparison with pioglitazone (-2.48% versus -1.86%, respectively; 95% confidence interval, -0.93 to -0.31; P = .0001, 48-week modified intent-to-treat population). Insulin glargine also yielded significantly greater reductions in fasting plasma glucose at all time points (end point difference, -34.9 mg/ dL; 95% confidence interval, -47.6 to -22.2; P < .0001). In comparison with pioglitazone, insulin glargine resulted in a lower overall incidence of possibly related treatmentemergent adverse events (12.0% versus 20.7%) and fewer study discontinuations (2.2% versus 9.1%), but a higher rate (per patient-year) of confirmed clinically relevant hypoglycemic episodes (blood glucose < 70 mg/dL and all severe hypoglycemia) (4.97 versus 1.04; P <.0001) and severe hypoglycemia (0.07 versus 0.01; P = .0309). Weight and body mass index changes were similar between the 2 treatment groups.ConclusionThe addition of insulin glargine early in the diabetes treatment paradigm in patients for whom sulfonylurea or metformin monotherapy had failed resulted in significantly greater improvements in glycemic control in comparison with the addition of pioglitazone. Although severe hypoglycemia was more frequent in patients with insulin glargine therapy, hypoglycemic events occurred in < 5% of patients in the insulin glargine treatment group. (Endocr Pract. 2010;16:588-599)     

Diabetes Duration and the Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Glargine Versus Comparator Treatment in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of diabetes duration on efficacy and safety in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) using insulin glargine versus comparator (oral antidiabetic drugs [OADs], dietary changes, or other insulins).MethodsData were pooled from randomized controlled clinical trials conducted in adults with T2DM with at least 24-week treatment with insulin glargine or a comparator, where predefined insulin titration algorithms were utilized to achieve fasting plasma glucose (FPG) concentrations of ≤ 100 mg/dL. Glycated hemoglobin A1C (A1C), FPG, and insulin dose and safety (hypoglycemia) outcomes were analyzed.ResultsNine studies were included in the analysis of 2,930 patients. Patients with shorter duration of diabetes were more likely to have greater reductions in A1C compared with those who had longer-duration disease (P < .0001). Disease duration did not affect change in FPG concentrations (P = .9017), but lower weight-adjusted insulin dose was correlated with longer-duration disease (P < .0001). Patients with longer-duration diabetes had increased risks of symptomatic hypoglycemia, confirmed hypoglycemia (self-monitored blood glucose < 50 mg/dL and < 70 mg/dL), and nocturnal hypoglycemia (all P < .001). No significant relationship was found between severe hypoglycemia and duration of diabetes. However, treatment with insulin glargine lowered A1C values more effectively than comparator treatments with fewer hypoglycemic episodes.ConclusionPatients with shorter-duration T2DM better achieved target A1C levels and had less hypoglycemia than those with longer disease duration. Insulin glargine was associated with reduced A1C and fewer hypoglycemic events than comparators, regardless of disease duration. (Endocr Pract. 2014;20:120-128)     

Effect Of A Targeted Glycemic Management Program On Provider Response To Inpatient Hyperglycemia

ObjectiveTo report the results of implementation of a Targeted Glycemic Management (TGM) Service pilot, with the goals of improving clinician awareness of available inpatient glycemic management protocols and improving responsiveness to and frequency of severe hyperglycemia.MethodsPatients with a blood glucose (BG) level ≥ 300 mg/dL who were hospitalized on a general medicine unit during three 12-week periods before, during, and after the TGM pilot were compared for responsiveness by the primary team, percentage of subsequent BG measurements between 80 and 180 mg/dL, and frequency of subsequent severe hyperglycemia (BG levels ≥ 300 mg/dL) and hypoglycemia (BG values < 70 mg/dL).ResultsIn comparison with pre-TGM and post-TGM periods, more patients during the TGM pilot had a modification of their glycemic regimen in response to severe hyperglycemia (49% versus 73% versus 50%, before, during, and after TGM, respectively; P = .044), and the percentage of patients with ≥ 50% of subsequent BG measurements in the desired range (27% versus 53% versus 32%; P = .035) was greatest during the TGM period. The incidence of subsequent severe hyperglycemia (20% versus 9% versus 16%; P = .0004) was lowest during the TGM period; however, the incidence of hypoglycemia was similar in all 3 periods (3.9% versus 3.7% versus 3.7%).ConclusionThese results indicate that a TGM Service can favorably influence glycemic management practices and improve glycemic control, but ongoing intervention is necessary for maintenance of these results. (Endocr Pract. 2011;17:552-557)     

Once-Daily Insulin Glargine Versus 6-Hour Sliding Scale Regular Insulin for Control of Hyperglycemia after a Bariatric Surgical Procedure: A Randomized Clinical Trial

ObjectiveTo determine whether once-daily insulin glargine could provide better glycemic control after an abdominal surgical procedure than the traditional use of sliding scale regular insulin (SSRI).MethodsBecause 20% to 30% of patients undergoing gastric bypass have a history of overt diabetes and another 5% to 10% are estimated to have impaired glucose tolerance, we chose to study these patients. We treated 81 patients with postoperative blood glucose levels of more than 144 mg/dL after a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgical procedure. They were randomized to receive either SSRI or insulin glargine either directly or after initial intravenous insulin infusion in the intensive care unit (ICU).ResultsOverall, the mean blood glucose level after SSRI therapy was 154 ± 33 mg/dL, and the mean blood glucose value after insulin glargine treatment was 134 ± 30 mg/dL (P < 0.01). The mean blood glucose level for patients first treated with intravenous insulin infusion in the ICU was 125 mg/dL, in comparison with 145 mg/dL in the non-ICU patients whose treatment began directly with 0.3 U/kg of insulin glargine. Of 926 blood glucose measurements, only 3 were less than 60 mg/dL.ConclusionIn this study, control of postoperative hyperglycemia was significantly better with use of insulin glargine in comparison with SSRI therapy, and hypo-glycemia was very infrequent. (Endocr Pract. 2007;13: 225-231)     

Identifying Risk Factors for Severe Hypoglycemia in Hospitalized Patients with Diabetes

ObjectiveSome of the deleterious effects of hypoglycemia in hospitalized patients include increased rates of mortality and longer length of stay. Our primary objective was to identify the risk factors associated with severe hypoglycemia to identify those patients at highest risk.MethodsThe medical records of 5,026 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) admitted in 2010 were reviewed to identify those patients that developed severe hypoglycemia (blood glucose [BG] < 40 mg/dL). We performed c2 tests to assess statistical significance. Adjusted logical regression was used to determine the risk factors for hypoglycemia in the hospital.ResultsOut of 5,026 DM patients included in our review, 81 experienced severe hypoglycemia (1.6%). Statistically higher proportions of chronic kidney disease (CKD; 69.1% vs. 46.9%, P < .001), congestive heart failure (CHF; 48.1% vs. 28.5%, P < .001), sepsis (49.4% vs. 12.5%, P < .001), insulin use (45.7% vs. 26.04%, P = .000), type 1 DM (21% vs. 5.1%, P = .000), and cirrhosis (14.8% vs. 7.2%, P = .009) were seen in the severe hypoglycemic group compared to the nonsevere hypoglycemic group. Overall, 84% of patients who experienced an episode of severe hypoglycemia in the hospital (BG < 40 mg/dL) had a previous episode of hypoglycemia (BG < 70 mg/dL). The odds ratios (ORs) for type 1 DM, sepsis, previous hypoglycemia, and insulin use were 3.43 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.81, 6.49), 2.64 (95% CI 1.6, 4.35), 46.1 (95% CI 24.76, 85.74), and 1.66 (95% CI 1.02, 2.69), respectively.ConclusionPrior episodes of hypoglycemia in the hospital, the presence of type 1 DM, insulin use, and sepsis were identified as independent risk factors for the development of severe hypoglycemia in the hospital. (Endocr Pract. 2014;20:1051-1056)     

Association of Glycemic Control Parameters with Clinical Outcomes in Chronic Critical Illness

ObjectiveChronic critical illness (CCI) is a term used to designate patients requiring prolonged mechanical ventilation and tracheostomy with associated poor outcomes. The present study assessed the impact of glycemic parameters on outcomes in a CCI population.MethodsA retrospective case series was performed including 148 patients in The Mount Sinai Hospital Respiratory Care Unit (2009-2010). Utilizing a semi-parametric mixture model, trajectories for the daily mean blood glucose (BG), BG range, and hypoglycemia rate over time identified low- (n = 87) and high-risk (n = 61) hyperglycemia groups and low- (n = 90) and high-risk (n = 58) hypoglycemia groups. The cohort was also classified into diabetes (DM, n = 48), stress hyperglycemia (SH, n = 85), and normal glucose (n = 15) groups.ResultsHospital- (28% vs. 13%, P = .0199) and 1-year mortality (66% vs. 46%, P = .0185) rates were significantly greater in the high- versus low-risk hyperglycemia groups, respectively. The hypoglycemia rate (< 70 mg/dL) was lower among ventilator-liberated patients compared to those who failed to liberate (0.092 vs. 0.130, P < .0001). In the SH group, both hospital mortality (high-risk hyperglycemia 48% and low-risk hyperglycemia 15%, P = .0013) and 1-year mortality (high-risk 74% and low-risk 50%, P = .0482) remained significantly different, while no significant difference in the diabetes group was observed. There were lower hypoglycemia rates with SH compared to diabetes (< 70 mg/dL: 0.086 vs. 0.182, P < .0001; < 40 mg/dL: 0.012 vs. 0.022, P = .0118, respectively).ConclusionTighter glycemic control was associated with improved outcomes in CCI patients with SH but not in CCI patients with diabetes. Confirmation of these findings may lead to stratified glycemic control protocols in CCI patients based on the presence or absence of diabetes. (Endocr Pract. 2014;20:884-893)     

Glycemic Variation and Hypoglycemia in Patients with well-Controlled Type 1 Diabetes on a Multiple Daily Insulin Injection Program with use of Glargine and Ultralente as Basal Insulin

ObjectiveTo evaluate glycemic variation and hypo-glycemia in patients with well-controlled type 1 diabetes receiving multiple daily insulin injections during glargine and Ultralente use as basal insulin in a clinical trial.MethodsTwenty-two patients (12 men and 10 women, median age, 43 years), with a hemoglobin A1c level < 7.8%, were randomized in a crossover design to receive either insulin glargine or Ultralente insulin as basal insulin for 4 months each, with insulin aspart as prandial insulin. Continuous glucose monitoring and the Fear of Hypoglycemia questionnaire were used at baseline and at the end of each treatment period.ResultsWhereas the mean amplitude of glycemic excursions showed a correlation with the area under the curve of blood glucose < 3.89 mmol/L per day, the number of periods during the day with hypoglycemia was significantly correlated with the M value. Measures of glycemic variation did not differ significantly between glargine and Ultralente treatment. With use of glargine therapy, the SD of blood glucose levels showed a tendency to be lower and the SD of nocturnal blood glucose concentrations was significantly lower. Glucose concentrations were significantly lower during the 1 hour before and the 3 hours after lunch with use of Ultralente. The “Worry” scale on the Fear of Hypoglycemia questionnaire was less during Ultralente therapy and correlated with the number of times blood glucose concentrations were < 3.89 mmol/L daily.ConclusionMeasures of glycemic variability and hypoglycemia need to be studied more in clinical trials of glycemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes. Glycemic variability is less, particularly at night, with glargine as basal insulin. (Endocr Pract. 2007;13:244-250)     

Glycemic Control with use of Insulin Glargine after Cardiothoracic Surgery: A Retrospective Study

ObjectivePerioperative glycemic control in critically ill cardiothoracic surgery patients may improve postsurgical outcomes. The objective of the study was to compare outcomes before and after the implementation of a protocol using subcutaneous (SC) glargine at transition from intravenous insulin infusion (IVII).MethodsIn August 2006, the Cleveland Clinic began using glargine and supplemental rapid-acting sliding scale insulin (SSI) at transition from IVII (glargine-SSI group). Before August 2006, only supplemental insulin was used (SSI-only group). The primary outcome was first blood glucose (BG1) after discontinuation of IVII. Secondary outcomes included the absolute difference between the last glucose before discontinuation of IVII (BG0) and BG1, mean glucose in the first 24 hours after discontinuation of IVII (BG24), need for SSI, and hypoglycemia.ResultsMean BG0, BG1, and BG24, and the difference between BG1 and BG0 and between BG24 and BG0 were not significantly different between groups. Diabetes mellitus (DM) patients who had received glargine had a lower mean difference between BG1 and BG0 and a lower mean BG24 than those who had not received glargine (14.6 mg/dL vs. 33.1 mg/dL; P = .20, and 163.8 mg/dL vs. 177.9 mg/dL; P = .29, respectively). A higher proportion of DM patients needed SSI than did non-DM patients (82% vs. 36%; P<.001).ConclusionGlargine administered at the cessation of IVII enabled less SSI coverage in diabetic patients subsequent to transition from IVII. However, there was no significant difference in BG control between the glargine-SSI and SSI-only groups. Prospective studies involving more patients are needed to show possible clinically significant benefits of this intervention. (Endocr Pract. 2013;19:485-493)     

Glycemic Control and Outcomes of Hospitalization in Noncritically Ill Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Admitted With Cardiac Problems or Infections

ObjectiveAlthough the importance of glycemic control is well established for patients with diabetes hospitalized for surgical problems, it has not been supported by clinical studies for patients with diabetes hospitalized on the medical floors.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study of 378 patients with type 2 diabetes admitted for cardiac or infectious disease (ID) diagnosis between September 1, 2011, and August 1, 2012. Exclusion criteria included type 1 diabetes, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), hospital stay shorter than 3 days, and daily glucocorticoid dose > 20 mg of methylprednisolone. The primary composite outcome included death during hospitalization, ICU transfer, initiation of enteral or parenteral nutrition, line infection, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, rise in plasma creatinine by 1 or > 2 mg/dL, new infection, an infection lasting for more than 20 days, and readmission within 30 days and between 1 and 10 months after discharge.ResultsPatients were stratified by mean blood glucose (BG) level: group 1 had mean BG of < 180 mg/dL (n = 286; mean BG, 142 ± 23 mg/dL), whereas group 2 had mean BG levels > 181 mg/dL (n = 92; mean BG, 218 ± 34 mg/dL; P < .0001). Group 2 had a 46% higher occurrence of the primary outcome (P < .0004). The rate of unfavorable events was greater in cardiac and ID patients with worse glycemic control (group 2).ConclusionOur data strongly support a positive influence of better glycemic control (average glycemia < 180 mg/dL or 10 mmol/L) on outcomes of hospitaliza-tion in patients with type 2 diabetes. (Endocr Pract. 2014; 20:1303-1308)     

Glucose Variability is an Independent Predictor of Mortality in Hospitalized Patients Treated with Total Parenteral Nutrition

ObjectiveHyperglycemia is associated with increased mortality in critically ill patients treated with total parenteral nutrition (TPN). The role of glucose variability (GV) in predicting outcomes in these patients is not known.MethodsThis retrospective study included medical and surgical patients receiving TPN in a community teaching hospital. GV was calculated by standard deviation (SD) of blood glucose (BG) values and by mean BG daily (Δ) change (daily max – daily minimum).ResultsA total of 276 medical and surgical patients (mean age: 51 ± 18 years), 19% with a history of diabetes mellitus (DM), and 74% with intensive care unit (ICU) admission were treated with TPN. During TPN, the mean daily BG was 142.9 ± 33 mg/dL; frequencies of hypoglycemia < 70 and < 40 mg/dL were 41% and 3%, respectively; and hospital mortality was 27.2%. The mean GV by SD was 38 ± 21 mg/dL and by mean (Δ) change 58 ± 34 mg/dL. GV was significantly higher in deceased patients (SD: 48 ± 25 vs. 34 ± 18 mg/dL and Δ change: 75 ± 39 vs. 51 ± 29 mg/dL, both P < .01) than surviving patients. Multivariate analysis adjusted for age, DM status, gender, APACHE (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation) score, mean daily glucose, and hypoglycemia revealed that GV was an independent predictor of hospital mortality (P < .05). The association between GV and mortality was limited to patients without a history of DM and was not present in patients with DM.ConclusionHigh GV is associated with increased hospital mortality independent of the presence and severity of hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia during TPN therapy. Prospective randomized trials are needed to determine if reduction in GV with intensive glycemic control improves clinical outcomes in patients treated with TPN. (Endocr Pract. 2014;20:41-45)     

Patient-Led Versus Physician-Led Titration of Insulin Glargine in Patients with Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Multinational Atlas Study

ObjectiveSelf-adjustment of insulin dose is commonly practiced in Western patients with type 2 diabetes but is usually not performed in Asian patients. This multinational, 24-week, randomized study compared patient-led with physician-led titration of once-daily insulin glargine in Asian patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes who were on 2 oral glucose-lowering agents.MethodsPatient-led (n = 275) or physician-led (n = 277) subjects followed the same dose-titration algorithm guided by self-monitored fasting blood glucose (FBG; target, 110 mg/dL [6.1 mmol/L]). The primary endpoint was change in mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) at week 24 in the patient-led versus physician-led titration groups.ResultsPatient-led titration resulted in a significantly higher drop in HbA_1c value at 24 weeks when compared with physician-led titration (− 1.40% vs. − 1.25%; mean difference, − 0.15; 95% confidence interval, − 0.29 to 0.00; P = .043). Mean decrease in FBG was greatest in the patient-led group (− 2.85 mmol/L vs. − 2.48 mmol/L; P = .001). The improvements in HbA_1c and FBG were consistent across countries, with similar improvements in treatment satisfaction in both groups. Mean daily insulin dose was higher in the patient-led group (28.9 units vs. 22.2 units; P < .001). Target HbA_1c of < 7.0% without severe hypoglycemia was achieved in 40.0% and 32.9% in the patient-led and physician-led groups, respectively (P = .086). Severe hypoglycemia was not different in the 2 groups (0.7%), with an increase in nocturnal and symptomatic hypoglycemia in the patient-led arm.ConclusionPatient-led insulin glargine titration achieved near-target blood glucose levels in Asian patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes who were on 2 oral glucose-lowering drugs, demonstrating that Asian patients can self-uptitrate insulin dose effectively when guided. (Endocr Pract. 2015;21:143-157)     

Clinical Outcomes Using Long-Term Combination Therapy with Insulin Glargine and Exenatide in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

ObjectiveTo examine the long-term effects of combination insulin glargine/exenatide treatment on glycemic control.MethodsWe conducted a 24-month retrospective US chart review of patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and hemoglobin A_1c (A1C) levels > 7.0% for whom glargine and exenatide were coprescribed in differing order (glargine added after exenatide [exenatide/glargine]; exenatide added after glargine [glargine/exenatide]). Treatment order groups were combined to form a pooled treatment group. Changes from baseline in A1C, patients with A1C ≤ 7.0%, body weight, glargine/exenatide daily dose, oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) use, and hypoglycemia were evaluated.ResultsTreatment groups were similar at baseline; however, patients in the glargine/exenatide group (n = 121) (vs exenatide/glargine group [n = 44]) had longer disease duration (11.8 vs 8.0 years) and took fewer OADs (1.7 vs 2.3). Overall, baseline A1C was 8.8 ± 1.3% and weight was 109.5 ± 25.3 kg. Significant A1C reductions emerged at month 6 and persisted throughout 24 months (vs baseline) in both treatment groups (pooled: –0.7 ± 1.6; P < .001), and 33.0% of patients achieved an A1C level ≤ 7.0%. After 24 months of exenatide/glargine, body weight remained unchanged (0.7 ± 8.3 kg; P = .640). With glargine/exenatide, body weight decreased (–2.5 ± 6.7 kg; P = .001). At month 24, daily glargine dose was 0.40 ± 0.23 units/kg for the exenatide/glargine group and 0.47 ± 0.30 units/kg for the glargine/exenatide group. Hypoglycemia frequency was similar in both treatment groups.ConclusionsRegardless of treatment order, long-term combined therapy with glargine and exenatide for up to 24 months in patients with inadequately controlled T2DM suggests reduction of A1C without significant weight gain or increased hypoglycemia risk. (Endocr Pract. 2012;18:17-25)     

Characterizing Glucose Changes Antecedent to Hypoglycemic Events in the Intensive Care Unit

ObjectiveTo determine whether patterns of glucose changes before hypoglycemia vary according to the severity of the event.MethodsIn this retrospective analysis, point-ofcare blood glucose (POC-BG) data were obtained from the intensive care units (ICUs) of a convenience sample of hospitals that responded to a survey on inpatient diabetes management quality improvement initiatives. To evaluate POC-BG levels before hypoglycemic events, data from patients who experienced hypoglycemia during their time in the ICU were examined, and their glucose changes were assessed against a comparison group of patients who achieved a glycemic range of 80 to 110 mg/dL without ever experiencing hypoglycemia. Absolute glucose decrease, glucose rate of change, and glucose variability before hypoglycemic events (< 40, 40-49, 50-59, and 60-69 mg/ dL) were calculated.ResultsA total of 128 419 POC-BG measurements from 2942 patients in 89 ICUs were analyzed. Patients who experienced the most severe hypoglycemic episodes had the largest absolute drop in their glucose levels before the event (P < .001). The glucose rate of change before a hypoglycemic event increased with worsening hypoglycemia: mean (± standard deviation) glucose rate of change was-1.69 (± 2.98) mg/dL per min before an episode with glucose values less than 40 mg/dL, -0.56 (± 2.65) mg/dL per min before an episode with glucose values 60 to 69 mg/dL, but only -0.39 (± 0.70) for patients who attained a glucose range of 80 to 110 mg/dL without hypoglycemia (P < .001). Glucose variability before an event progressively increased with worsening biochemical hypoglycemia and was least among patients achieving glucose concentrations in the 80 to 110-mg/dL range without hypoglycemia (P < .001).ConclusionsAntecedent glucose change and variability were greater for patients who experienced hypoglycemia. If monitored, these patterns could potentially alert clinicians and help them take preventive measures. Further examination of how these parameters interact with other predisposing risk factors for hypoglycemia is warranted. (Endocr Pract. 2012;18:317-324)     

Eating and Glycemic Control Among Critically Ill Patients Receiving Continuous Intravenous Insulin

Objective: Consensus guidelines recommend that intensive care unit (ICU) patients with blood glucose (BG) levels >180 mg/dL receive continuous intravenous insulin (CII). The effectiveness of CII at controlling BG levels among patients who are eating relative to those who are eating nothing by mouth (nil per os; NPO) has not been described.Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 260 adult patients (156 eating, 104 NPO) admitted to an ICU between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2014, who received CII. Patients were excluded for a diagnosis of diabetic ketoacidosis or hyperglycemic hyperosmolar nonketotic syndrome, admission to an obstetrics service, or receiving continuous enteral or parenteral nutrition.Results: Among 22 baseline characteristics, the proportion of patients receiving glucocorticoid treatment (GCTx) (17.3% eating, 37.5% NPO; P<.001) and APACHE II score (15.0 ± 7.5 eating, 17.9 ± 7.9 NPO; P = .004) were significantly different between eating and NPO patients. There was no significant difference in the primary outcome of patient-day weighted mean BG overall (153 ± 8 mg/dL eating, 156 ± 7 mg/dL NPO; P = .73), or day-by-day BG (P = .37) adjusted for GCTx and APACHE score. Surprisingly, there was a significant difference in the distribution of BG values, with eating patients having a higher percentage of BG readings in the recommended range of 140 to 180 mg/dL. However, eating patients showed greater glucose variability (coefficient of variation 23.1 ± 1.0 eating, 21.2 ± 1.0 NPO; P = .034).Conclusion: Eating may not adversely affect BG levels of ICU patients receiving CII. Whether or not prandial insulin improves glycemic control in this setting should be studied.Abbreviations: BG = blood glucose; CII = continuous insulin infusion; CV = coefficient of variation; HbA1c = hemoglobin A1c; ICU = intensive care unit; NPO = nil per os; PDWMBG = patient day weighted mean blood glucose     

Benchmarking Glycemic Control In U.S. Hospitals

ObjectiveReport data on glucose control from 635 U.S. hospitals.MethodsPoint-of-care blood glucose (POC-BG) test data from January through December 2012 from 635 facilities were extracted. Glucose control was evaluated using patient-day–weighted mean POC-BG values. We calculated hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia rates, stratified by presence or absence of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and we evaluated the relationship between glycemic control and hospital characteristics.ResultsIn total, 51,375,764 POC-BG measurements (non-ICU, 39,197,762; ICU, 12,178,002) from 2,612,966 patients (non-ICU, 2,415,209; ICU, 575,084) were analyzed. The mean POC-BG was 167 mg/dL for non-ICU patients and 170 mg/dL for ICU patients. The prevalence of hyperglycemia (defined as glucose value > 180 mg/dL) was 32.3 and 28.2% in non-ICU and ICU patients, respectively. The prevalence of hypoglycemia (defined as glucose value < 70 mg/dL) was 6.1 and 5.6% in non-ICU and ICU patients, respectively. In non-ICU and ICU settings, the patient-day–weighted mean glucose was highest in the smallest hospitals, in rural hospitals, and in hospitals located in the Northeast (all P < .01). For non-ICU patients, we observed a significant difference in the percentage of patient days with hypoglycemia by geographic region only (P < .001). In ICU patients, the prevalence of hypoglycemia varied significantly by hospital type (P < .03) and geographic region (P < .01).ConclusionIn this largest POC-BG data set analysis conducted to date, glycemic control varied according to hospital characteristics. Our findings remain consistent with previous reports. Among other variables, national benchmarking of inpatient glucose data will need to consider differences in hospital characteristics. (Endocr Pract. 2014;20:876-883)     

Standardized Glycemic Management and Perioperative Glycemic Outcomes in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus who Undergo Same-Day Surgery

ObjectiveTo assess the safety and effectiveness of a standardized glycemic management protocol in patients with diabetes mellitus who undergo same-day surgery.MethodsThe perioperative glycemic management protocol consisted of preoperative instructions and perioperative order sets for management of subcutaneous and intravenous insulin. Patients with known diabetes admitted to same-day surgery during a 10-month period were observed. Patient demographic information and all capillary blood glucose (CBG) values obtained during the sameday surgery visit were collected. Hyperglycemia, defined as a CBG concentration of 200 mg/dL or greater, prompted notification of the attending anesthesiologist. While use of the perioperative order sets was encouraged, the attending anesthesiologist retained the prerogative to treat according to these order sets or their usual care. Physician compliance with the standardized order sets was determined by chart review in the patients who had a documented blood glucose value of 200 mg/dL or greater.ResultsPatients managed with the standardized order sets had greater reductions in CBG values (percentage change, 35 ± 20.5% vs 18 ± 24%, P < .001) and lower postoperative CBG values (186 ± 53 mg/dL vs 208 ± 63 mg/dL, P < .05) than patients who received usual care. No cases of intraoperative or postoperative hypoglycemia (CBG < 70 mg/dL) were observed in either group.ConclusionsA systematic approach to glycemic management that includes instructions for preoperative adjustments to home diabetic medications and order sets for treatment of perioperative hyperglycemia is safe and can be more effective than usual care for ambulatory surgery patients with diabetes. (Endocr Pract. 2011;17:404-411)