Blood glucose levels should be targeted to 140-200 mg/dL in surgical or medical ICU patients on insulin therapy, according to advice the American College of Physicians published online May 24 in the American Journal of Medical Quality.
Also, "clinicians should avoid targets less than ... 140 mg/dL because harms are likely to increase with lower blood glucose targets," the group said (Am. J. Med. Qual. 2013 [doi: 10.1177/1062860613489339]).
The advice isn’t new, but instead a restatement of ACP’s 2011 inpatient glycemic control guidelines reissued as part of its "Best Practice Advice" campaign, said Paul G. Shekelle, Ph.D., senior author of both the advice paper and guidelines (Ann. Intern. Med. 2011;154:260-7).
"This is based on the prior guidelines, so there’s nothing new here in that sense. The Best Practice Advice series sometimes runs in parallel to the guidelines, sometimes it is something completely different than any ACP guidelines, and sometimes, like this case, it runs asynchronous to the guidelines. Ideally, these will be more synchronous in the future," Dr. Shekelle, director of the RAND Corporation’s Southern California Evidence-Based Practice Center, said in an interview.
ACP’s advice is largely in keeping with glucose control recommendations from other groups, which have tended toward liberalization in recent years amid evidence that aggressive, euglycemic control in hospitalized patients, even if they have diabetes, doesn’t improve outcomes and carries too high a risk of hypoglycemia and its attendant problems.
"Nobody is advocating tight glycemic control anymore in the hospital. It isn’t necessary and may be harmful," said Dr. Etie S. Moghissi, the lead author on a 2009 inpatient glycemic control consensus statement issued by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American Diabetes Association (Diabetes Care 2009;32:1119-31).
The consensus statement recommended an upper limit of 180 mg/dL based on the pivotal NICE-SUGAR study, instead of 200 mg/dL, which Dr. Shekelle said ACP chose because it was the upper target limit in several of the additional studies upon which the group based its 2011 guidelines (N. Engl. .J Med. 2009;360:1283-97).
But Dr. Moghissi, who is with the department of medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, said she’s concerned that 200 mg/dL might be too high.
"We know that when we set targets, people do not achieve them. So when we set a higher target, most of the time people go above that. The concern" is that a target of 200 mg/dL "may be perceived [as meaning that] a little bit over 200 mg/dL is okay," but "above 200 mg/dL, usually there are issues with increased risk of infection, poor wound healing, volume depletion," and other problems, she said in an interview.
Dr. Shekelle and Dr. Moghissi said they have no relevant disclosures.