insulin--isophane and Critical-Illness

Reasonable glycemic control is difficult to achieve in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) receiving continuous enteral nutrition therapy (CENT). There are no solid evidence-based medicine guidelines regarding this issue in these patients. The purpose of this study was to determine if the use of a basal-bolus insulin regimen is more effective than neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin alone in controlling blood glucose in non-critically ill patients with DM receiving CENT. We performed a retrospective, records-based review comparing basal-bolus with NPH insulin regimen in these patients, hospitalized in the internal medicine wards in our hospital. Number of hypoglycemic episodes, mean blood glucose, and time-to-target (time needed to reach 3 successive glucose readings in the appropriate target of 140-180 mg/dL) were evaluated in each regimen. Mean blood glucose was 199.22 mg/dL (95% confidence interval [CI], 179.8-218.5 mg/dL) in the basal-bolus vs 190.73 mg/dL (95% CI, 172.1-209.2 mg/dL) in the NPH insulin regimen ( P = .538). Time-to-target was an average of 3.65 ± 1.75 days in the basal-bolus group and 4.33 ± 2.42 days in the NPH group ( P = .364). There were no statistically significant differences in frequency of hypoglycemia ( P = .364). Rate of death was high (around 40%) in both groups. We conclude that hospitalized hyperglycemic patients receiving CENT can be treated by either basal-bolus or NPH insulin regimens. However, the overall glucose levels remain elevated during hospitalization irrespective of the insulin therapy. There is an urgent need to define glucose targets in this population of patients and to evaluate prospectively head-to-head different insulin protocols.

Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Blood Glucose; Critical Illness; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Enteral Nutrition; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Hospitalization; Humans; Hypoglycemia; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin; Insulin, Isophane; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies

The intent of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transitioning from a continuous intravenous (IV) regular human insulin (RHI) or intermittent IV RHI therapy to subcutaneous neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin with intermittent corrective IV RHI for critically ill patients receiving continuous enteral nutrition (EN).. Data were obtained from critically ill trauma patients receiving continuous EN during transitional NPH insulin therapy. Target blood glucose concentration (BG) range was 70-149 mg/dL. BG was determined every 1-4 hours.. Thirty-two patients were transitioned from a continuous IV RHI infusion (CIT) to NPH with intermittent corrective IV RHI therapy. Thirty-four patients had NPH added to their preexisting supplemental intermittent IV RHI therapy (SIT). BG concentrations were maintained in the target range for 18 ± 3 and 15 ± 4 h/d for the CIT and SIT groups, respectively (P < .05). Thirty-eight percent of patients experienced a BG <60 mg/dL, and 9% had a BG <40 mg/dL. Hypoglycemia was more prevalent for those who were older (P < .01) or exhibited greater daily BG variability (P < .01) or worse HgbA1C (p < 0.05).. Transitional NPH therapy with intermittent corrective IV RHI was effective for achieving BG concentrations within 70-149 mg/dL for the majority of the day. NPH therapy should be implemented with caution for those who are older, have erratic daily BG control, or have poor preadmission glycemic control.

Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Adult; Aged; Blood Glucose; Critical Illness; Drug Administration Schedule; Enteral Nutrition; Female; Humans; Hyperglycemia; Hypoglycemia; Hypoglycemic Agents; Insulin; Insulin, Isophane; Male; Middle Aged; Treatment Outcome