Abstract
Purpose of Review
We reviewed the strategies associated with hypoglycemia risk reduction among critically ill non-pregnant adult patients.
Recent Findings
Hypoglycemia in the ICU has been associated with increased mortality in a number of studies. Insulin dosing and glucose monitoring rules, response to impending hypoglycemia, use of computerization, and attention to modifiable factors extrinsic to insulin algorithms may affect the risk for hypoglycemia. Recurring use of intravenous (IV) bolus doses of insulin in insulin-resistant cases may reduce reliance upon higher IV infusion rates.
Summary
In order to reduce the risk for hypoglycemia in the ICU, caregivers should define responses to interruption of continuous carbohydrate exposure, incorporate transitioning strategies upon initiation and interruption of IV insulin, define modifications of antihyperglycemic therapy in the presence of worsening renal function or chronic kidney disease, and anticipate the effects traceable to other medications and substances. Institutional and system-wide quality improvement efforts should assign priority to hypoglycemia prevention.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
The problem of hypoglycemia and its association with mortality have dampened enthusiasm for strict glycemic control in the ICU for at least some populations, leading to upward revision of glycemic targets in recent years and interest in predictors of hypoglycemia [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24, 25••, 26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48, 49•, 50,51,52,53,54,55,56]. The prognostic importance of dysglycemia and the optimal targets for control may depend upon the hospital setting and the medical condition being treated, the pre-admission presence or absence of diabetes, and, among those having diabetes, the severity and chronicity of hyperglycemia prior to admission. In the critical care setting, in general, a higher target blood glucose (BG) may be associated with reduced occurrence of hypoglycemia, although not invariably so, and increased occurrence of hypoglycemia may accompany greater glycemic variability [1, 9,10,11, 13, 19, 21, 24, 29, 31, 33,34,35,36, 45, 47, 49•, 53, 54]. The prevalence of hypoglycemia in the ICU may vary by hospital type and geographic region [32]. Hypoglycemia traditionally has been identified as a glucose result < 70 mg/dL, the approximate threshold for the release of counter-regulatory hormones and severe hypoglycemia as glucose < 40 mg/dL [57]. Most recently, based on recommendations from the International Hypoglycaemia Study Group, no threshold for severe hypoglycemia is specified, but clinically significant hypoglycemia has been defined as < 54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L), while a glucose alert value is defined as ≤ 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) [58,59,60].
Harms Associated With Hypoglycemia in the ICU
From the results of randomized trials designed to compare outcomes during strict vs. more lenient glycemic controls in the ICU, the greater occurrence of hypoglycemia among the more tightly controlled groups has provoked concern about the possibility of an adverse impact of hypoglycemia on outcomes [1, 2, 6, 10, 13, 25••]. A meta-analysis of 14 trials comparing intensive insulin therapy to conventional glycemic control in the ICU found that the pooled risk ratio for hypoglycemic events was 6.0 with intensive therapy (95% CI 4.5–8.0, p = 0.08) [11]. A systematic review of studies comparing intensive vs. conventional control confirmed the pattern of hypoglycemia in the treatment arms assigned to intensive therapy [19].
Among critically ill patients, studies of hypoglycemia in the ICU have identified factors independent of antihyperglycemic therapy that may promote both hypoglycemia and adverse outcomes, analyses of which have shown that ICU hypoglycemia is associated independently with adverse outcomes [3, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14,15,16,17, 20, 23, 25••, 26, 37, 51, 55] (Appendix Table 1). Although the confounders of the relationship between hypoglycemia and adverse outcomes are expected to differ according to setting, when the study population is not restricted to ICU admissions, there is an association between hospital hypoglycemia and hospital deaths [26]. The risk of adverse outcome may increase with greater frequency of hypoglycemic events [17, 25••, 37, 55]. In one ICU study, during the use of an effective glycemic control protocol, non-survivors were shown to have greater insulin sensitivity than survivors [56]. In the Normoglycemia in Intensive Care Evaluation—Survival Using Glucose Algorithm Regulation (NICE-SUGAR) study, the hazard ratio for death in association with moderate or severe hypoglycemia was greater in the absence of insulin treatment [25••]. From a report in the setting of acute myocardial infarction, similarly, the increased mortality risk associated with hypoglycemia was confined to patients who developed hypoglycemia spontaneously, without insulin therapy [12]. However, not all studies have confirmed a stronger association with mortality for spontaneous hypoglycemia in comparison to medication-induced hypoglycemia [51].
Simplistically, when trials have been designed to compare two glycemic targets, the strategies used to attain lower targets have been associated with higher average doses of insulin [1, 6, 13]. For example, 50.2 ± 38.1 vs. 16.9 ± 29.0 insulin units/day (p < 0.001) were used in the intensive vs. conventional groups of the NICE-SUGAR study [10]. At given insulin doses, nutritional exposure and insulin resistance affect the risk for hypoglycemia. These factors also reasonably might be expected to modify the insulin dose requirement necessary to achieve a given glycemic target. For patients having type 2 diabetes (T2DM) with A1C ≥ 7%, an observational study contrasting liberal vs. standard targets for glycemic control suggested that treatment initiated at a higher glycemic threshold did not reduce average insulin delivery, and despite a reduction of risk for “relative hypoglycemia” at 4.1–6.0 mmol/L, the reduction in risk for moderate or severe hypoglycemia did not reach statistical significance [47]. Another study of patients with pre-existing diabetes, assigned to differing targets of 80–140 mg/dL for A1C < 7% or 110–160 mg/dL for A1C ≥ 7%, showed a significantly higher insulin dose requirement in the higher A1C group (i.e., the group treated to a higher target, speculatively the more insulin-resistant group), without significant difference in the percentage of patients experiencing hypoglycemia (Appendix Table 2) [53].
Statistical reports showing the association between hypoglycemia and adverse ICU outcomes generally do not link those outcomes to specific hypoglycemic events [2, 6, 13,14,15,16,17, 23, 26, 55, 61]. It is suspected that inflammatory mediators and cardiac arrhythmias may indirectly mediate some adverse outcomes associated with hypoglycemia [62,63,64,65]. Some events may be traceable to direct central neurologic or cardiovascular consequences of a hypoglycemic event [4]. Such events might include temporary or long-term alteration of consciousness or mental status, seizures, arrhythmia, and death. Iatrogenic harm during insulin therapy is most convincingly demonstrated if the event occurs within the time frame of insulin action, together with documentation of hypoglycemia [51].
It is recommended that ICUs have a hypoglycemia treatment protocol. Between published sources, the treatment protocol details differ slightly [27, 66,67,68, 69•, 70]. Assuming patients will have access and receive insulin by intravenous (IV) infusion, the suggested components of hypoglycemia treatment protocols for the ICU generally instruct the nurse to do the following:
-
recognize BG value that defines hypoglycemia
-
detect hypoglycemia by scheduled monitoring
-
recheck BG for confirmation when hypoglycemia is detected if the patient is asymptomatic
-
treat with concentrated dextrose bolus or increased rate of dextrose infusion
-
(optional) use a graduated scale for dextrose dose according to BG
-
temporarily interrupt (T2DM) or sharply reduce IV insulin infusion rate (T1DM)
-
notify prescriber
-
perform posthypoglycemic recheck within the defined time
-
retreat if posthypoglycemic recheck is below the pre-specified goal
-
recheck again according to BG within the time defined by protocol to prevent recurrence
-
automatically resume ordered antihyperglycemic therapy at revised dose and under conditions of recovery from hypoglycemia as pre-specified by protocol, unless canceled or revised by prescriber.
Strategies to Reduce Risk for Hypoglycemia During Intravenous Insulin Infusion
Several strategies to mitigate risk for hypoglycemia during intravenous insulin infusion are applicable to physician orders, given in response to BG reports, or to nurse-implemented therapy conducted under explicit titration rules of user-interpreted paper protocols. Computerization of insulin algorithms as a decision support tool may improve protocol adherence while simplifying the burden of interpretation and decision-making for nursing staff and prescribers [49•, 71, 72]. A discussion of design features of dose-determining insulin infusion algorithms is beyond the scope of this review. It may be probable that recommendations for “protocol maxima” for insulin delivery could be developed for specific populations without loss of control of hyperglycemia. However, for a given level of insulin resistance and carbohydrate exposure, the risk of hypoglycemia probably is greater with higher insulin doses (Appendix Table 2) [21, 25••, 33, 45, 47, 49•, 52, 53, 73,74,75,76, 77•]. The future may hold increasing interest in the use of recurring doses of IV bolus therapy to help mitigate the risk of hypoglycemia during IV insulin infusion therapy [78]. Recurring conservatively dosed IV insulin “pushes” may comprise part of the intended hourly rate of IV insulin delivery (Appendix Table 3) [21, 49•, 77•, 79,80,81,82]. Within user-interpreted paper protocols guiding IV insulin infusion therapy, some reports describe rules for recurring doses of IV bolus therapy or for subcutaneous (SC) prandial insulin therapy preparatory to transitioning from IV infusion to subcutaneous insulin therapy. Computer-guided IV insulin infusion protocols also may provide for recurring doses of IV insulin bolus therapy [49•, 77•].
In the sections that follow, we will discuss the strategies for hypoglycemia prevention that require consideration of not only a sequence of timed BG measurements, but also patient factors and clinical course. The strategies may be referenced by hospital insulin algorithms and/or embedded within ICU glycemic management policies, protocols, and procedures, which often result from interdisciplinary hospital- or system-wide quality improvement efforts [69•, 83, 84••].
Define Responses to Interruption of Continuous Carbohydrate Exposure
Interruption of IV dextrose, parenteral feedings (PN), or continuous enteral feedings (EN) may result in sudden changes of insulin requirements [3]. The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) Research and Education Foundation has recommended that protocol-driven and evidence-based order sets be developed for insulin use and BG monitoring during planned and unplanned interruptions of EN or PN [85]. Principles of inpatient nutrition recently have been reviewed in this publication [86]. Rules for insulin dosing during continuous carbohydrate administration generally employ assumptions about an insulin-to-carbohydrate ratio for initialization and gradually provide for an increase of insulin delivery as needed. Continuation of basal insulin delivery for patients having type 1 diabetes (T1DM) is required even when nutritional insulin coverage suddenly needs to decline [80, 87, 88]. The Dignity Health algorithm recommends that in case the PN/EN feeding is stopped or the rate is reduced by 50% or more, then, the insulin infusion rate should be reduced by 50% for 1 h, the protocol should be used to determine subsequent rate changes, and BG should be checked hourly until in range × 4 h [84••]. Management with subcutaneous insulin usually necessitates preventive infusion of dextrose-containing fluids in case of unexpected interruption of PN/EN feedings.
Incorporate Transitioning Strategies Upon Initiation and Interruption of IV Insulin
Most algorithms for IV insulin infusion initialize treatment conservatively, with exceptions for specific circumstances. Patients with T1DM when transitioning to an IV insulin infusion during nihil per os (NPO) status will require at minimum an hourly infusion rate that ensures continuation of their usual true basal insulin requirement. IV dextrose, sufficient to meet energy needs and prevent ketogenesis, will require additional insulin coverage. For patients with T2DM treated with insulin prior to hospitalization, transition from ambulatory insulin requirements to IV insulin therapy cannot be based on an assumption that equivalent doses will be required in the hospital setting. Unusually high insulin doses in the ambulatory setting do not necessarily predict equally high doses upon admission to the hospital. Established subcutaneous U-500 regular insulin doses may be found to be excessive after conversion to U-100 insulin subcutaneous insulin, once the patient is in the inpatient setting [89,90,91]. On the other hand, defined stresses or corticosteroids may augment insulin requirements to doses greater than those used in the ambulatory setting [27]. The insulin requirements for previously normoglycemic patients having stress hyperglycemia differ according to condition. A dynamic algorithm should quickly discover adjustments necessary to match changing conditions of hospitalization.
During IV insulin infusion, at the time of introduction of oral feedings for a patient previously NPO but before transition to subcutaneous basal insulin therapy, some centers not only maintain basal control by continuing insulin infusion but also provide prandial rapid-acting subcutaneous insulin to supplement the insulin infusion [79, 81, 82, 84••]. Subcutaneous insulin analogs may have onset of action within 5 to 15 min, with a peak action at 30 to 90 min and a duration of action of 4 to 6 h [92]. Prandial coverage with subcutaneous insulin analogs may restrain oscillations of BG which otherwise could destabilize control by leading to postprandial hyperglycemia and subsequent overestimation of the hourly insulin infusion requirement. Dungan and colleagues argued that the introduction of prandial insulin overlapping with IV insulin infusion was intended to allow more precise calculation of basal insulin requirements [81]. The practice of introducing prandial coverage during ongoing IV insulin infusion is prevalent during recovery from open heart surgery [81, 93]. By preventing a postprandial excursion that could lead to miscalculating insulin requirements at the next titration, both hyper- and hypoglycemia may be prevented. We strongly advocate this approach for patients who are eating but who are not ready to transition off of IV insulin.
Transition from IV insulin infusion to subcutaneous insulin therapy is a time of risk for hypoglycemia [81, 82, 93, 94]. The ASHP has recommended order sets for transition from IV to subcutaneous administration of insulin, specifying monitoring recommendations and guiding insulin use based on the patient’s nutritional status [85]. The pharmacodynamic profiles of long-acting and rapid-acting insulin analogs have been summarized, describing their suitability for basal and prandial coverage, respectively, for patients who are eating [92, 95]. We have insufficient evidence in the inpatient setting concerning the “follow-on” bio-similar U-100 insulin glargine, longer-acting basal (U-100 degludec), or new insulin concentrations (U-200 degludec, U-300 glargine) to compare these with the older formulations that have been referenced in most discussions of inpatient care, and we look forward to future studies that might establish their relative safety in the hospital setting in comparison to U 100 glargine, detemir, or neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin.
When SC insulin is used to provide basal and continuous EN coverage, safeguards are required in case of unforeseen interruption of carbohydrate exposure [82, 87, 96]. In one study, successful transition from IV insulin infusion to basal and prandial coverage was defined as half or more of all first-day BG values in the strict ranges of 100–140 mg/dL before meals and 100–180 mg/dL after meals. High mean doses of IV insulin infused in the 24 h preceding the transition predicted unsuccessful transition, (≥ 1.6 units/h, OR 2.202, 95% CI 1.045–4.640) [94]. In this study, 7.7% of patients experienced hypoglycemia on the first day of SC therapy and 26.8% within the first 3 days [94].
Because of the short half-life of IV regular insulin, for those who will continue to require insulin after transition, including all patients having T1DM, it is essential to start the first dose of intermediate- or long-acting subcutaneous insulin at least 2 h prior to discontinuation of the insulin infusion [96]. The pharmacodynamics of IV regular insulin infusion are complex, dependent in part upon patient condition and insulin dose [97, 98]. In one study examining the effect of IV infusion of regular insulin upon incremental glucose disposal rate, the 50% activation times were between 21 ± 2 and 74 ± 6 min, and the 50% deactivation times were between 31 ± 6 and 78 ± 5 min, depending upon the dose of insulin and the presence or absence of obesity [97]. In another study, among non-diabetic subjects, the 50% activation time was 32 ± 5 min and deactivation time was 63 ± 5 min (mean ± SE), with persistence of action for 90 min or more [98]. Glycemic effects of the previous infusion may continue to occur for 90 min or more. If IV insulin infusion will terminate at a time of day when the first dose of long-acting insulin analog is not yet due, a bridging dose of NPH and/or regular insulin may be used once, to be given at least 2 h (for NPH) or 1 h (for regular insulin) before interruption of IV insulin infusion, until the patient can begin to receive a once-daily dose of long-acting insulin analog at the usual time of administration [14]. A 2012 prospective randomized study of 61 patients with known T1DM or T2DM showed a benefit in starting long-acting insulin within 12 h of the time of inception of the IV infusion, with intent to reduce rebound hyperglycemia at the time of discontinuation of the infusion. This approach prevented rebound hyperglycemia without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia. Since this practice has not been examined specifically among patients having doubtful absorption of subcutaneous insulin, it may be less applicable to hemodynamically unstable ICU admissions [99].
Basal requirements may be overestimated at the time of transition to SC insulin. We suggest excluding the postprandial time frames when averaging IV insulin infusion requirements to estimate basal requirements. In stable situations, the 24-h requirement for scheduled basal long-acting analog insulin that is to be started or added then may be ~ 80% of the 24-h amount of IV insulin, extrapolated from the observation of insulin requirement during the most recent 6 to 8 h of IV insulin infusion during a time frame during which there have been no meals, such as midnight to 0800 hours. In order to use the 80% guideline, observation should be made during a time frame of relatively stable insulin resistance; there must be no change of carbohydrate-containing maintenance fluids, enteral feedings, or PN at the time of transition to SC insulin therapy; there must have been independence from vasopressors and continuous veno-venous hemodialysis (CVVHD); and there must be no change of corticosteroid dose. Otherwise, a more conservative starting rule for SC basal insulin should be used. In the setting of recovery from heart surgery, a randomized study of 82 patients by Dungan and colleagues suggested that the initiation of basal SC therapy with 50% of the 24-h basal insulin requirement as projected from IV insulin infusion rates, rather than 65 or 80%, provided similar control of mean glucose but better protection against hypoglycemia, which otherwise occurs for some patients within the 72 h subsequent to transition when higher doses were used [81].
Define Modifications in the Presence of Worsening Renal Function or Chronic Kidney Disease
It is recommended that during IV insulin infusion, in the presence of chronic kidney disease (CKD), there should be conservative BG goals and insulin infusion rates [17, 36, 100, 101]. Exogenous insulin bypasses first pass hepatic extraction, which is normally responsible for removal of about 40–60% of endogenously secreted insulin. The kidney is therefore the main organ responsible for metabolizing exogenous insulin [101]. In the setting of acute or chronic renal failure, insulin clearance consequently is reduced and the half-life of exogenous insulin is prolonged. The renal contribution to gluconeogenesis may be compromised. In the critical care setting, renal failure increases the risk for hypoglycemia during insulin therapy [5, 17, 22, 36].
Dickerson et al. conducted a study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a modified IV insulin algorithm for glycemic control in critically ill ventilator-dependent adult trauma patients with renal failure [102]. The modified insulin algorithm, compared to a discontinued historical algorithm, was adapted for patients with renal failure by having a higher threshold of BG for both the reduction and increase of the infusion rate. Mean BG was higher in the modified algorithm group (n = 25) compared with historical control group (n = 21): 145 ± 10 mg/dL vs. 133 ± 14 mg/dL (p = 0.001). The proportions of patients treated with the modified algorithm compared to the discarded historical algorithm who experienced moderate hypoglycemia (BG 40–59 mg/dL) or severe hypoglycemia (BG < 40 mg/dL) were decreased (32 vs. 76%; p = 0.001) and eliminated (0 vs. 29%; p = 0.006), respectively. The new algorithm provided the best combination of glycemic outcomes, first by improving patient safety as evidenced by the absence of episodes of severe hypoglycemia and second, by still achieving therapeutic efficacy within a broader therapeutic BG range.
At the time of transitioning from IV insulin infusion, for a population of trauma patients receiving continuous enteral feedings and therefore at risk for unexpected interruptions of feedings, in preference to using long-acting insulin analog, the same site favored the greater safety of using NPH at 12-h intervals, supplemented by IV correctional regular insulin as needed. The transition protocol entailed the initiation of NPH in divided doses every 12 h, starting with a daily dose of about 30–50% of the insulin requirement that had been established during the 24 h of IV infusion prior to transition, with IV correctional regular insulin at 3–4-h intervals as needed. When this regimen was titrated to a plateau of NPH dose, typically after about 5 days, then approximately two thirds of the total daily dose of insulin was NPH, and one third was correctional regular insulin [103].
Anticipate Effects Traceable to Other Medications and Substances
Hypoglycemia may result from use of antihyperglycemic drugs, other drugs, or alcohol or from failure to taper antihyperglycemic therapy during tapering of corticosteroids [57, 61, 96, 104, 105]. In the ICU setting, the simultaneous use of octreotide and insulin has been associated with hypoglycemia [3]. If sulfonylureas were used immediately prior to ICU admission, then, the treatment of severe hypoglycemia requires IV dextrose infusion and monitoring to detect any relapse. A protracted time frame of risk for relapsing hypoglycemia among sulfonylurea users is most likely to occur when renal excretion of the active metabolite is required and renal function is compromised, especially in older adults and those having impaired renal function.
A systematic review of available evidence for drugs reported to cause hypoglycemia with exclusion of those used to treat hyperglycemia found that of the 164 drugs associated with hypoglycemia, none had high-quality evidence supporting the associations, only 7 drugs had moderate-quality evidence, and 5 had low-quality evidence [61]. The most commonly cited drugs were gatifloxacin, pentamidine, quinine, beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibiters, and IGF. The majority of cases did require hospitalization, suggesting to the authors that drug-induced hypoglycemia may cause significant morbidity. Caution is recommended in prescribing these drugs to elderly patients as well as patients with sepsis, renal, or hepatic disease or in patients taking other antihyperglycemic agents known to cause hypoglycemia.
Glucocorticoids are commonly used in the setting of organ transplantation, graft-vs.-host reactions, treatment of inflammatory conditions, and chemotherapy regimens [105]. Management of treatment-induced hyperglycemia from these agents begins with monitoring of point-of care BG and obtaining an A1C, if one has not been performed in the past 2–3 months for persons with diabetes. Hyperglycemia in the ICU may be best managed with IV insulin infusion to cover basal insulin requirements [59, 84••, 105]. Protocols for IV insulin infusion may recommend an anticipatory reduction of aggressiveness at the time of interruption or tapering of glucocorticoid dose [14]. During any tapering of glucocorticoid therapy after transition to subcutaneous therapy, anticipatory tapering of insulin should occur [104, 105].
Conclusion
For institutions not using proprietary software, insulin-dosing strategies to mitigate risk for hypoglycemia during IV insulin infusion may include the development of recommended “protocol maxima” rates of insulin delivery appropriate to patient condition and supplementation with recurring doses of SC or IV bolus insulin to substitute for the part of the dose that otherwise would be delivered by IV insulin infusion. Reduction of hypoglycemia may require appropriate response to interruption of continuous carbohydrate exposure, transitioning strategies between the use of IV and subcutaneous insulin, modification of antihyperglycemic therapy in the presence of changing renal function or CKD, anticipation of effects traceable to other medications, and process improvement efforts to address protocol violations and nursing burden. Institutional quality improvement efforts should assign high priority to glycemic management programs, including hypoglycemia prevention strategies.
Abbreviations
- ASHP:
-
American Society of Health-System Pharmacists Research and Education Foundation
- BG:
-
Blood glucose
- ICU:
-
Intensive care unit
- CKD:
-
Chronic kidney disease
- CVVHD:
-
Continuous veno-venous hemodialysis
- IV:
-
Intravenous
- NPO:
-
Nihil per os
- NPH:
-
Neutral protamine Hagedorn
- SC:
-
Subcutaneous
- PN:
-
Parenteral nutrition
- EN:
-
Enteral nutrition
References
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
Van den Berghe G, Wouters P, Weekers F, Verwaest C, Bruyninckx F, Schetz M, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2001;345(19):1359–67.
Van den Berghe G, Wilmer A, Hermans G, Meersseman W, Wouters PJ, Milants I, et al. Intensive insulin therapy in the medical ICU. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(5):449–61.
Vriesendorp TM, van Santen S, DeVries JH, de Jonge E, Rosendaal FR, Schultz MJ, et al. Predisposing factors for hypoglycemia in the intensive care unit*. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(1):96–101.
Vriesendorp TM, DeVries JH, van Santen S, Moeniralam HS, de Jonge E, Roos YBWEM, et al. Evaluation of short-term consequences of hypoglycemia in an intensive care unit*. Crit Care Med. 2006;34(11):2714–8.
Krinsley JS, Grover A. Severe hypoglycemia in critically ill patients: risk factors and outcomes*. Crit Care Med. 2007;35(10):2262–7.
Brunkhorst FM, Engel C, Bloos F, Meier-Hellmann A, Ragaller M, Weiler N, et al. Intensive insulin therapy and Pentastarch resuscitation in severe sepsis. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(2):125–39.
Bagshaw SM, Bellomo R, Jacka MJ, Egi M, Hart GK, George C, et al. The impact of early hypoglycemia and blood glucose variability on outcome in critical illness. Crit Care. 2009;13(3):R91.
Cryer PE, Axelrod L, Grossman AB, Heller SR, Montori VM, Seaquist ER, et al. Evaluation and management of adult hypoglycemic disorders: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. 2009;94(3):709–28.
Falciglia M, Freyberg RW, Almenoff PL, D’Alessio DA, Render ML. Hyperglycemia-related mortality in critically ill patients varies with admission diagnosis*. Crit Care Med. 2009;37(12):3001–9.
Finfer S, Chittock DR, Su SY, Blair D, Foster D, Dhingra V, et al. Intensive versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(13):1283–97.
Griesdale DEG, de Souza RJ, van Dam RM, Heyland DK, Cook DJ, Malhotra A, et al. Intensive insulin therapy and mortality among critically ill patients: a meta-analysis including NICE-SUGAR study data. Can Med Assoc J. 2009;180(8):821–7.
Kosiborod M. Relationship between spontaneous and iatrogenic hypoglycemia and mortality in patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association. 2009;301(15):1556.
Preiser JC, Devos P, Ruiz-Santana S, Melot C, Annane D, Groeneveld J, et al. A prospective randomised multi-centre controlled trial on tight glucose control by intensive insulin therapy in adult intensvie care units: the Glucontrol study. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35:1738–48.
Bellam H, Braithwaite SS. Hospital hypoglycemia: from observation to action. Insulin. 2010;5(1):16–36.
Egi M, Bellomo R, Stachowski E, French CJ, Hart GK, Taori G, et al. Hypoglycemia and outcome in critically ill patients. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85(3):217–24.
Hermanides J, Bosman RJ, Vriesendorp TM, Dotsch R, Rosendaal FR, Zandstra DF, et al. Hypoglycemia is associated with intensive care unit mortality*. Crit Care Med. 2010;38(6):1430–4.
D’Ancona G, Bertuzzi F, Sacchi L, Pirone F, Stringi V, Arcadipane A, et al. Iatrogenic hypoglycemia secondary to tight glucose control is an independent determinant for mortality and cardiac morbidity. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. 2011;40(2):360−6.
Egi M, Bellomo R, Stachowski E, French CJ, Hart GK, Taori G, et al. The interaction of chronic and acute glycemia with mortality in critically ill patients with diabetes*. Crit Care Med. 2011;39(1):105–11.
Kansagara D, Fu R, Freeman M, Wolf F, Helfand M. Intensive insulin therapy in hospitalized patients: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154(4):268.
Krinsley JS, Schultz MJ, Spronk PE, Harmsen RE, van Braam HF, van der Sluijs JP, et al. Mild hypoglycemia is independently associated with increased mortality in the critically ill. Crit Care. 2011;15(4):R173.
Lazar HL, McDonnell MM, Chipkin S, Fitzgerald C, Bliss C, Cabral H. Effects of aggressive versus moderate glycemic control on clinical outcomes in diabetic coronary artery bypass graft patients. Ann Surg. 2011;254(3):458–64.
Stamou SC, Nussbaum M, Carew JD, Dunn K, Skipper E, Robicsek F, et al. Hypoglycemia with intensive insulin therapy after cardiac surgery: predisposing factors and association with mortality. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2011;142(1):166–73.
Badawi O, Waite MD, Fuhrman SA, Zuckerman IH. Association between intensive care unit-acquired dysglycemia and in-hospital mortality*. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(12):3180–8.
Braithwaite SS. Glycemic variability in hospitalized patients: choosing metrics while awaiting the evidence. Current diabetes reports. 2012;13(1):138–54.
•• Finfer S, Liu B, Chittock DR, Norton R, Myburgh JA, McArthur C, et al. Hypoglycemia and risk of death in critically ill patients. N Engl J Med. 2012;367(12):1108–18. In the large NICE-SUGAR trial, mortality was associated with severity of hypoglycemia. The association between severe hypoglycemia and mortality was greater with spontaneous hypoglycemia, compared to hypoglycemia associated with insulin use
Garg R, Hurwitz S, Turchin A, Trivedi A. Hypoglycemia, with or without insulin therapy, is associated with increased mortality among hospitalized patients. Diabetes Care. 2012;36(5):1107–10.
Jacobi J, Bircher N, Krinsley J, Agus M, Braithwaite SS, Deutschman C, et al. Guidelines for the use of an insulin infusion for the management of hyperglycemia in critically ill patients. Crit Care Med. 2012;40(12):3251–76.
Krinsley JS, Egi M, Kiss A, Devendra AN, Schuetz P, Maurer PM, et al. Diabetic status and the relation of the three domains of glycemic control to mortality in critically ill patients: an international multicenter cohort study. Crit Care. 2013;17(2):R37.
Lanspa MJ, Hirshberg EL, Phillips GD, Holmen J, Stoddard G, Orme J. Moderate glucose control is associated with increased mortality compared with tight glucose control in critically ill patients without diabetes. Chest. 2013;143(5):1226–34.
Sechterberger MK, Bosman RJ, Oudemans-van Straaten HM, Siegelaar SE, Hermanides J, Hoekstra JBL, et al. The effect of diabetes mellitus on the association between measures of glycaemic control and ICU mortality: a retrospective cohort study. Crit Care. 2013;17(2):R52.
Wagstaff AE, Cheung NW. Diabetes and hyperglycemia in the critical care setting: has the evidence for glycemic control vanished? (or … is going away?). Current diabetes reports. 2013;14(1):444.
Bersoux S, Cook C, Kongable G, Shu J, Zito D. Benchmarking glycemic control in U.S. hospitals. Endocr Pract. 2014;20(9):876–83.
Kalfon P, Giraudeau B, Ichai C, Guerrini A, Brechot N, Cinotti R, et al. Tight computerized versus conventional glucose control in the ICU: a randomized controlled trial. Intensive Care Med. 2014;40(2):171–81.
Lanspa MJ, Dickerson J, Morris AH, Orme JF, Holmen J, Hirshberg EL. Coefficient of glucose variation is independently associated with mortality in critically ill patients receiving intravenous insulin. Crit Care. 2014;18(2):R86.
Okabayashi T, Shima Y, Sumiyoshi T, Kozuki A, Tokumaru T, Iiyama T, et al. Intensive versus intermediate glucose control in surgical intensive care unit patients. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(6):1516–24.
Sandler V, Misiasz MR, Jones J, Baldwin D. Reducing the risk of hypoglycemia associated with intravenous insulin. Journal of diabetes science and technology. 2014;8(5):923–9.
Kalfon P, Le Manach Y, Ichai C, Bréchot N, Cinotti R, Dequin P-F, et al. Severe and multiple hypoglycemic episodes are associated with increased risk of death in ICU patients. Critical Care. 2015;19(1):153.
Kotagal M, Symons RG, Hirsch IB, Umpierrez GE, Dellinger EP, Farrokhi ET, et al. Perioperative hyperglycemia and risk of adverse events among patients with and without diabetes. Ann Surg. 2015;261(1):97–103.
Bláha J, Mráz M, Kopecký P, Stříteský M, Lipš M, Matias M, et al. Perioperative tight glucose control reduces postoperative adverse events in nondiabetic cardiac surgery patients. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015;100(8):3081–9.
Krinsley JS, Preiser J-C. Time in blood glucose range 70 to 140 mg/dl >80% is strongly associated with increased survival in non-diabetic critically ill adults. Crit Care. 2015;19(1):1.
May A, Mukherjee K, Albaugh V, Richards J, Rumbaugh K. Glycemic control in critically ill surgical patients: risks and benefits. Open Access Surgery. 2015;8:27−42..
Roberts GW, Quinn SJ, Valentine N, Alhawassi T, O'Dea H, Stranks SN, et al. Relative hyperglycemia, a marker of critical illness: introducing the stress hyperglycemia ratio. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2015;100(12):4490–7.
Umpierrez G, Cardona S, Pasquel F, Jacobs S, Peng L, Unigwe M, et al. Randomized controlled trial of intensive versus conservative glucose control in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery: GLUCO-CABG trial. Diabetes Care. 2015;38(9):1665–72.
Braithwaite SS, Hirsch IB. Chapter 3. Perils of glycemic variability and rapid correction of chronic hyperglycemia. In: Draznin B, editor. Managing diabetes and hyperglycemia in the hospital setting. Alexandria: American Diabetes Association; 2016. p. 25–49.
Di Muzio F, Presello B, Glassford NJ, Tsuji IY, Eastwood GM, Deane AM, et al. Liberal versus conventional glucose targets in critically ill diabetic patients. Crit Care Med. 2016;44(9):1683–91.
Egi M, Krinsley JS, Maurer P, Amin DN, Kanazawa T, Ghandi S, et al. Pre-morbid glycemic control modifies the interaction between acute hypoglycemia and mortality. Intensive Care Med. 2016;42(4):562–71.
Kar P, Plummer MP, Bellomo R, Jenkins AJ, Januszewski AS, Chapman MJ, et al. Liberal glycemic control in critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes. Crit Care Med. 2016;44(9):1695–703.
Mahmoodpoor A, Hamishehkar H, Beigmohammadi MT, Sanaie S, Shadvar K, Soleimanpour H, et al. Predisposing factors for hypoglycemia and its relation with mortality in critically ill patients undergoing insulin therapy in an intensive care unit. Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine. 2016;6(1):e33849..
• Marvin MR, Inzucchi SE, Besterman BJ. Minimization of hypoglycemia as an adverse event during insulin infusion: further refinement of the Yale protocol. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2016;18(8):480–6. Inclusion of a mid-protocol bolus feature was followed by a reduction in the occurrence of hypoglycemia during IV insulin infusion
Preiser J-C, Chase JG, Hovorka R, Joseph JI, Krinsley JS, De Block C, et al. Glucose control in the ICU. J diabetes sci technol. 2016;10(6):1372–81.
Saliba L, Cook CH, Dungan KM, Porter K, Murphy CV. Medication-induced and spontaneous hypoglycemia carry the same risk for hospital mortality in critically ill patients. J Crit Care. 2016;36:13–7.
Welsh N, Derby T, Gupta S, Fulkerson C, Oakes DJ, Schmidt K, et al. Inpatient hypoglycemic events in a comparative effectiveness trial for glycemic control in a high-risk population. Endocr Pract. 2016;22(9):1040–7.
Krinsley JS, Preiser J-C, Hirsch IB. Safety and efficacy of personalized glycemic control in critically ill patients: a 2-year before and after interventional trial. Endocr Pract. 2017;23(3):318–30.
Krinsley JS, Maurer P, Holewinski S, Hayes R, McComsey D, Umpierrez GE, et al. Glucose control, diabetes status, and mortality in critically ill patients. Mayo Clin Proc. 2017;92(7):1019–29.
Lowden E, Schmidt K, Mulla I, Andrei A-C, Cashy J, Oakes DJ, et al. Evaluation of outcomes and complications in patients who experience hypoglycemia after cardiac surgery. Endocr Pract. 2017;23(1):46–55.
Uyttendaele V, Dickson JL, Shaw GM, Desaive T, Chase JG. Untangling glycaemia and mortality in critical care. Critical Care. 2017;21(1).
Seaquist ER, Anderson J, Childs B, Cryer P, Dagogo-Jack S, Fish L, et al. Hypoglycemia and diabetes: a report of a workgroup of the American Diabetes Association and the Endocrine Society. Diabetes Care. 2013;36(5):1384–95.
Glycemic targets. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(Supplement 1):S48–56.
Diabetes care in the hospital. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(Supplement 1):S120–S7.
International_Hypoglycaemia_Study_Group. Glucose concentrations of less than 3.0 mmol/L (54 mg/dL) should be reported in clinical trials: a joint position statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes: Table 1. Diabetes care. 2017;40(1):155–7.
Murad MH, Coto-Yglesias F, Wang AT, Sheidaee N, Mullan RJ, Elamin MB, et al. Drug-induced hypoglycemia: a systematic review. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2009;94(3):741–5.
Desouza C, Salazar H, Cheong B, Murgo J, Fonseca V. Association of hypoglycemia and cardiac ischemia: a study based on continuous monitoring. Diabetes Care. 2003;26(5):1485–9.
Razavi Nematollahi L, Kitabchi AE, Stentz FB, Wan JY, Larijani BA, Tehrani MM, et al. Proinflammatory cytokines in response to insulin-induced hypoglycemic stress in healthy subjects. Metab Clin Exp. 2009;58(4):443–8.
Desouza CV, Bolli GB, Fonseca V. Hypoglycemia, diabetes, and cardiovascular events. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(6):1389–94.
Clark AL, Best CJ, Fisher SJ. Even silent hypoglycemia induces cardiac arrhythmias. Diabetes. 2014;63(5):1457–9.
Marvin MR, Inzucchi SE, Besterman BJ. Computerization of the Yale insulin infusion protocol and potential insights into causes of hypoglycemia with intravenous insulin. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2013;15(3):246–52.
Devi R, Zohra T, Howard BS, Braithwaite SS. Target attainment through algorithm design during intravenous insulin infusion. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2014;16(4):208–18.
Dungan KM, Gavrilina T, Andridge R, Hall C, Schuster DS. Long-term safety and efficacy of a universal nursing-run intravenous insulin guideline. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2014;40(3):119.
• Neinstein A, MacMaster HW, Sullivan MM, Rushakoff R. A detailed description of the implementation of inpatient insulin orders with a commercial electronic health record system. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2014;8(4):641–51. Implementation of a comprehensive and complex inpatient glycemic management program can be achieved with the use of computerized order entry, including a hypoglycemia order set
Arnold P, Paxton RA, McNorton K, Szpunar S, Edwin SB. The effect of a hypoglycemia treatment protocol on glycemic variability in critically ill patients. J Intensive Care Med. 2013;30(3):156–60.
Cavalcanti AB, Silva E, Pereira AJ, Caldeira-Filho M, Almeida FP, Westphal GA, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing a computer-assisted insulin infusion protocol with a strict and a conventional protocol for glucose control in critically ill patients. J Crit Care. 2009;24(3):371–8.
Dumont C, Bourguignon C. Effect of a computerized insulin dose calculator on the process of glycemic control. Am J Crit Care. 2012;21(2):106–15.
Barletta JF, McAllen KJ, Eriksson EA, Deines G, Blau SA, Thayer SC, et al. The effect of a computer-assisted insulin protocol on glycemic control in a surgical intensive care unit. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2011;13(4):495–500.
Yamashita S, Ng E, Brommecker F, Silverberg J, Adhikari NK. Implementation of the glucommander method of adjusting insulin infusions in critically ill patients. Can J Hosp Pharm. 2011;64(5):333–9.
Horibe M, Nair BG, Yurina G, Neradilek MB, Rozet I. A novel computerized fading memory algorithm for glycemic control in postoperative surgical patients. Anesth Analg. 2012;115(3):1.
Van Herpe T, Mesotten D, Wouters PJ, Herbots J, Voets E, Buyens J, et al. LOGIC-insulin algorithm-guided versus nurse-directed blood glucose control during critical illness: the LOGIC-1 single-center, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2012;36(2):188–94.
• Stewart KW, Pretty CG, Tomlinson H, Thomas FL, Homlok J, Noémi SN, et al. Safety, efficacy and clinical generalization of the STAR protocol: a retrospective analysis. Ann Intensive Care. 2016;6(1):24. An effective and relatively low-dose insulin infusion protocol, optionally including a bolus feature, was accompanied by low rates of hypoglycemia
Hirsch IB. Intravenous bolus insulin delivery: implications for closed-loop control and hospital care. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2012;14(1):6–7.
DeSantis AJ, Schmeltz LR, Schmidt K, O'Shea-Mahler E, Rhee C, Wells A, et al. Inpatient management of hyperglycemia: the northwestern experience. Endocr Pract. 2006;12(5):491–505.
Olansky L, Sam S, Lober C, Yared J-P, Hoogwerf B. Cleveland Clinic cardiovascular intensive care unit insulin conversion protocol. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2009;3(3):478–86.
Dungan K, Hall C, Schuster D, Osei K. Comparison of 3 algorithms for basal insulin in transitioning from intravenous to subcutaneous insulin in stable patients after cardiothoracic surgery. Endocr Pract. 2011;17(5):753–8.
Kreider KE, Lien LF. Transitioning safely from intravenous to subcutaneous insulin. Current diabetes reports. 2015;15(5).
Maynard G, Kulasa K, Ramos P, Childers D, Clay B, Sebasky M, et al. Impact of a hypoglycemia reduction bundle and a systems approach to inpatient glycemic management. Endocr Pract. 2015;21(4):355–67.
•• Maynard GA, Holdych J, Kendall H, Harrison K, Montgomery PA, Kulasa K. Improving glycemic control safely in critical care patients: a collaborative systems approach in nine hospitals. Endocr Pract. 2017;23(5):583–93. Commitment to a quality improvement program within a healthcare system, while addressing reduction of hyperglycemia, can also effectively address prevention of hypoglycemia prevention
Cobaugh DJ, Maynard G, Cooper L, Kienle PC, Vigersky R, Childers D, et al. Enhancing insulin-use safety in hospitals: practical recommendations from an ASHP Foundation expert consensus panel. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2013;70(16):1404–13.
Drincic AT, Knezevich JT, Akkireddy P. Nutrition and hyperglycemia management in the inpatient setting (meals on demand, parenteral, or enteral nutrition). Current diabetes reports. 2017;17(8):59.
Korytkowski MT, Salata RJ, Koerbel GL, Selzer F, Karslioglu E, Idriss AM, et al. Insulin therapy and glycemic control in hospitalized patients with diabetes during enteral nutrition therapy: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Diabetes Care. 2009;32(4):594–6.
Hsia E, Seggelke SA, Gibbs J, Rasouli N, Draznin B. Comparison of 70/30 biphasic insulin with glargine/lispro regimen in non-critically ill diabetic patients on continuous enteral nutrition therapy. Nutr Clin pract : Off Publ Am Soc Parenter Enter Nutr. 2011;26(6):714–7.
Tripathy P, Lansang M. U-500 regular insulin use in hospitalized patients. Endocr Pract. 2015;21(1):54–8.
Palladino CE, Eberly ME, Emmons JT, Tannock LR. Management of U-500 insulin users during inpatient admissions within a veterans affairs medical center. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2016;114:32–6.
Paulus AO, Colburn JA, True MW, Beckman DJ, Davis RP, Wardian JL, et al. Evaluation of Total daily dose and glycemic control for patients taking U-500 regular insulin admitted to the hospital. Endocr Pract. 2016;22(10):1187–91.
Hirsch IB. Insulin analogues. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(2):174–83.
Furnary AP, Braithwaite SS. Effects of outcome on in-hospital transition from intravenous insulin infusion to subcutaneous therapy. Am J Cardiol. 2006;98(4):557–64.
Avanzini F, Marelli G, Donzelli W, Busi G, Carbone S, Bellato L, et al. Transition from intravenous to subcutaneous insulin: effectiveness and safety of a standardized protocol and predictors of outcome in patients with acute coronary syndrome. Diabetes Care. 2011;34(7):1445–50.
Davis S, Lamos E, Younk L. Concentrated insulins: the new basal insulins. Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management. 2016;12:389400.
Kennihan M, Zohra T, Devi R, Srinivasan C, Diaz J, Howard B, et al. Individualization through standardization: electronic orders for subcutaneous insulin in the hospital. Endocr Pract. 2012;18(6):976–87.
Prager R, Wallace P, Olefsky JM. In vivo kinetics of insulin action on peripheral glucose disposal and hepatic glucose output in normal and obese subjects. J Clin Investig. 1986;78(2):472–81.
Mudaliar S, Mohideen P, Deutsch R, Ciaraldi TP, Armstrong D, Kim B, et al. Intravenous Glargine and regular insulin have similar effects on endogenous glucose output and peripheral activation/deactivation kinetic profiles. Diabetes Care. 2002;25(9):1597–602.
Hsia E, Seggelke S, Gibbs J, Hawkins RM, Cohlmia E, Rasouli N, et al. Subcutaneous administration of glargine to diabetic patients receiving insulin infusion prevents rebound hyperglycemia. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012;97(9):3132–7.
Apel J, Baldwin D. Improving the safety and effectiveness of insulin therapy in hospitalized patients with diabetes and chronic renal failure. Chapter 14. In: Draznin B, editor. Managing diabetes and hyperglycemia in the hospital setting A clinician’s guide: American Diabetes Association. Alexandria, Virginia. ; 2016. p. 182–91.
Gianchandani RY, Neupane S, Iyengar JJ, Heung M. Pathophysiology and management of hypoglycemiain end-stage renal disease patients: a review. Endocr Pract. 2017;23(3):353–62.
Dickerson RN, Lynch AM, Maish GO, Croce MA, Minard G, Brown RO. Improved safety with intravenous insulin therapy for critically ill patients with renal failure. Nutrition. 2014;30(5):557–62.
Dickerson RN, Wilson VC, Maish GO, Croce MA, Minard G, Brown RO. Transitional NPH insulin therapy for critically ill patients receiving continuous enteral nutrition and intravenous regular human insulin. J Parenter Enter Nutr. 2013;37(4):506–16.
Clore J, Thurby-Hay L. Glucocorticoid-induced hyperglycemia. Endocr Pract. 2009;15(5):469–74.
Baldwin D, Apel J. Management of hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients with renal insufficiency or steroid-induced diabetes. Curr Diabetes Rep. 2012;13(1):114–20.
Pretty CG, Le Compte AJ, Chase J, Shaw GM, Preiser J-C, Penning S, et al. Variability of insulin sensitivity during the first 4 days of critical illness: implications for tight glycemic control. Ann Intensive Care. 2012;2(1):17.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Susan Shapiro Braithwaite has a patent for an insulin algorithm which has not yet been embodied as a device. She is on the editorial board for Endocrine Practice, as an associate editor. She also receives honoraria form the American Diabetes Association for book reviews.
Dharmesh B. Bavda, Thaer Idrees, Faisal Qureshi, and Oluwakemi T. Soetan declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
This article is part of the Topical Collection on Hospital Management of Diabetes
Appendix
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Braithwaite, S.S., Bavda, D.B., Idrees, T. et al. Hypoglycemia Reduction Strategies in the ICU. Curr Diab Rep 17, 133 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-017-0963-3
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-017-0963-3