| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Clinical Studies |
Departments of Medicine and Pediatrics, Harbor-University of California-Los Angeles Medical Center, Torrance, California 90509
Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Eli Ipp, M.D., Harbor-University of California-Los Angeles Medical Center, 1000 West Carson Street, Torrance, California 90509-2910.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
At 2000 h, the mean (±SEM) blood glucose concentration was 265.7 ± 10.8; at 0300 h, it was 122.8 ± 3.4; and at 0700 h, it was 123.8 ± 5.1 mg/dL. On the next day, mean blood glucose levels (before and 2 h after a meal) were: breakfast, 102.5 ± 5.9 and 177.3 ± 19.2; lunch, 138.9 ± 15.5 and 136.3 ± 11.4; dinner, 105.7 ± 7.2 and 178.1 ± 15.7 mg/dL. There was no significant difference between mean calculated and administered total insulin dosage the next day (84.2 ± 7.0 vs. 78.2 ± 8.2 U). Thus, a weight-based algorithm for iv insulin infusion induced near-normoglycemia in NIDDM and successfully predicted the insulin dose requirement. We conclude that initiating insulin therapy in NIDDM patients can be achieved rapidly and efficiently based on a nurse-managed overnight insulin infusion.
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Initiation of insulin therapy is, therefore, an empirical process, in which low doses of insulin are used initially, and increasing quantities are introduced as required to improve glucose control. When there is a need for more rapid induction of tight control, as during hospital admission for surgery, there are few reported methods to induce normoglycemia effectively and safely in patients with NIDDM. In insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, methods have been developed to induce normoglycemia and also estimate initial insulin requirements (3, 4, 5), but to our knowledge no rapid and accurate methods have yet been established for patients with NIDDM. A previous study (6) that included some patients with NIDDM, induced and maintained normoglycemia, but did not attempt to predict subsequent sc insulin requirements. This study was designed to develop a feedback-controlled insulin delivery system for patients with NIDDM to induce normoglycemia and also to determine whether the overnight response to insulin can help estimate the insulin requirement for the following day. The insulin infusion algorithm used in this protocol was adapted from the algorithm used by White et al. (3), designed for lean patients with insulin-dependent diabetes.
|
Subjects and Methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Twenty-seven subjects with poorly controlled NIDDM were studied. As wide a spectrum of patients as possible was entered into the study. Their age range was 29–64 yr, and the duration of their diabetes was 1–19 yr. Seventeen were women, and 10 were men. The mean body mass index was 30.9 ± 0.9 kg/m2 (range, 22.8–44.8 kg/m2). The mean fasting blood glucose level was 265.7 ± 10.8 mg/dL. Twenty-one patients were taking oral hypoglycemic agents, three patients were taking insulin, and three were new-onset, untreated patients. The three patients taking insulin had been treated with oral hypoglycemic agents for many years and were recently switched to insulin due to poor glucose control. All studies were performed at the Clinical Research Center at Harbor-University of California-Los Angeles Medical Center (Torrance, CA). All patients gave their informed consent to participate in these studies, and they were approved by the institutional review board. Patients who were in a state of acute metabolic distress, had an active infection, or had a recent history of symptomatic coronary artery disease or renal or hepatic insufficiency were excluded from the study.
Procedures
Overnight insulin infusion.
Thirty studies were performed in
the 27 subjects. The studies were begun at 2000 h with the
initiation of a 12-h iv insulin infusion using a nurse-managed
algorithm. Blood glucose was measured at 60-min intervals by glucometer
(Ames Division, Miles Laboratories, Elkhart, IN). The iv insulin
infusion rate was adjusted by the nursing staff according to an
algorithm based on the blood glucose level (Table 1
).
The goal of the algorithm was to induce and maintain near-normal blood
glucose concentrations by the following morning (i.e.
90–130 mg/dL). A euglycemic period was defined as the period that
began when blood glucose concentrations first fell below 130 mg/dL and
ended with the end of the infusion. Both insulin infusion rate and
frequency of blood sampling were varied in response to the blood
glucose concentration. Blood glucose sampling was performed at hourly
intervals until the blood glucose level fell below 130 mg/dL. After
this, blood sampling continued at 60-min intervals as long as glucose
measurements remained between 90–130 mg/dL. If the glucose
concentration was less than 90 mg/dL or greater than 130 mg/dL,
sampling frequency was switched to 30-min intervals. The increased
frequency of sampling permitted a more rapid response to glucose
concentrations that were outside of the targeted euglycemic range.
|
) failed to reduce blood glucose into the target
range. The repeat infusion used an adjusted algorithm that provided
increased insulin at each level of glucose measurement.
Preprandial insulin treatment.
The overnight insulin
infusion algorithm was tested on 11 subjects. Once it was clear that
this protocol was successfully achieving its goal, we attempted to
predict the insulin dose required to control blood glucose on the
following day. This was performed in another 16 patients. Calculations
were based upon the basal insulin requirements necessary to maintain
euglycemia (<130 mg/dL) during the overnight insulin infusion,
i.e. the euglycemic insulin requirement (EIR). This was
determined from the following parameters: 1) the duration of the
euglycemic period (hours), i.e. measured from the time that
blood glucose first dropped below 130 mg/dL; 2) the sum of the hourly
rates of insulin infusion during the euglycemic period as defined in
the first parameter (the hourly rates of insulin infusion are obtained
from the chart shown in Table 1; when their sum is divided by the
duration of the euglycemic period, this is the EIR, and is expressed as
units per h); and 3) the basal insulin requirement (BIR), expressed as
units per 12 h, was then estimated using the data obtained in the
second parameter and multiplied by 12.
Insulin requirements for the following day were then calculated. The estimated BIR provided the total amount of insulin required if the patient had been maintained at euglycemia from 2 h after dinner (2000 h) until breakfast (0800 h). The 12-h BIR was then used to calculate the total insulin due for the following day; BIR was assumed to constitute 20% of total 24-h insulin needs (7). Insulin need for the next 12 h thus would constitute 80% of the total 24-h insulin requirement and was split into three preprandial doses of regular insulin. Preprandial insulin doses for breakfast, lunch, and dinner were calculated by splitting the total daytime dose into the following ratio: 40:30:30. Insulin was injected 30 min before each meal. The prebreakfast dose of insulin was administered 30 min before the infusion was stopped. Preprandial insulin doses obtained by the above calculation were designated the predicted dose and were the primary guide for dose calculation. The predicted dose was adjusted only if the premeal blood glucose level did not reach a target range of 80–120 mg/dL.
Analytical procedures
Blood glucose measurements at the bedside were performed by trained staff using a glucometer device. The accuracy of these measurements was verified initially by comparing the glucometer measurements with plasma samples obtained at 3-h intervals in early studies (mean plasma glucose, 155.4 ± 10.6 mg/dL; corresponding mean blood glucose concentration, 156.3 ± 9.6 mg/dL; n = 55 paired glucose samples; correlation: y = 1.09x - 0.80; r = 0.82; P < 0.0001). Plasma glucose was measured using the hexokinase method with an Abbott autoanalyzer (Abbott, North Chicago, IL) (8). Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t test for paired samples. Data are presented as the mean ± SEM.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Figure 1 demonstrates the effect of the overnight
insulin infusion on blood glucose concentrations during all 30
infusions. The mean blood glucose at 2000 h was 265.7 ± 10.8
mg/dL. The mean blood glucose concentration fell to 129.6 ± 5.1
mg/dL by the fifth hour and remained at a plateau within a range of
120.0 ± 3.5 to 129.3 ± 4.4 mg/dL throughout the night. When
the infusion was discontinued, the mean blood glucose concentration was
123.8 ± 5.1 mg/dL.
|
also displays the mean insulin infusion rates administered
during this protocol. The infusion was started at 2000 h at a mean
rate of 63.2 ± 2.7 mU/kg·h. The mean infusion rate decreased
along with glucose concentrations, reaching a plateau after 5 h.
The mean infusion rate at the fifth hour was 23.7 ± 1.7 mU/kg·h
and remained between 20.7 ± 1.4 and 23.9 ± 1.5 mU/kg·h
until the following morning. At the time the infusion was discontinued,
the mean insulin infusion rate was 22.6 ± 2.4 mU/kg·h. Efficacy of the overnight insulin infusion
Mean blood glucose concentrations reached near-normoglycemic
levels (130 mg/dL or less by glucometer) by 0100 h with the
insulin infusion algorithm (Fig. 1) and were maintained at
near-normoglycemic levels between 0100–0800 h. The range of blood
glucose concentrations observed in individual subjects during this time
was between 69–190 mg/dL. Seventy-nine percent of the blood glucose
readings during the euglycemic period were within the range of 90–130
mg/dL. Of the 21% of measurements that remained outside this range,
8% were below the target range (<90 mg/dL), and 13% were above it
(>130 mg/dL).
The total number of infusions was 30. In 27 of those infusions, glucose concentrations reached the target euglycemic range of below 130 mg/dL. On 3 occasions, the infusion failed to bring the blood glucose into the target range. In these patients, we repeated the infusion the following evening using an adjusted algorithm to provide an increased insulin dosage at each level of glucose measurement. This successfully reduced plasma glucose levels to below 130 mg/dL (data not included). The 3 patients who failed the initial insulin infusion did not differ from other subjects with respect to body mass index, sex, age, duration of diabetes, or initial fasting blood glucose level.
Effect of predicted sc insulin doses on blood glucose concentrations
Sixteen patients received sc insulin injections the following day
in an attempt to test the predicted insulin doses using the results of
the infusion algorithm. Figure 2A demonstrates the
effect of administered preprandial insulin doses on blood glucose
concentrations. Mean blood glucose concentrations before breakfast,
lunch, and dinner were 102.5 ± 5.9, 138.9 ± 15.5, and
105.7 ± 7.2 mg/dL, respectively. Mean 2 h postprandial
glucose concentrations for breakfast, lunch, and dinner were 177.3
± 19.2, 136.3 ± 11.4, and 178.1 ± 15.7 mg/dL,
respectively. Our goal was not to produce extremely tight control. As a
result, of 96 glucometer measurements taken before and after meals,
only 1 was less than 60 mg/dL.
|
The mean total sc insulin dose administered was 78.2 ± 8.2 U
compared with an estimated mean total requirement of 84.2 ± 7.0
U. The administered insulin represented an average requirement of
0.9 ± 0.07 U/kg. In Fig. 2B, the mean predicted preprandial
insulin doses for breakfast, lunch, and dinner are compared to the mean
administered preprandial insulin doses. The mean predicted preprandial
insulin doses, calculated from data derived from the insulin infusion,
for breakfast, lunch, and dinner were 33.7 ± 2.8, 25.6 ±
2.2, and 24.9 ± 2.1 U, respectively. Administered doses of
insulin were dependent upon the clinical situation at the time of
treatment and were not necessarily identical with the predicted dose.
Actual doses of insulin administered were based upon the predicted
dose, but were modified depending upon the prevailing preprandial blood
glucose measurements and also the response to regular insulin during
the previous meal.
Mean administered preprandial insulin doses for breakfast, lunch, and
dinner were 33.6 ± 2.9, 24.4 ± 3.4, and 20.2 ± 2.6 U,
respectively. Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference
between administered and predicted insulin doses for breakfast
(P = 0.85) or lunch (P = 0.57).
However, there was a significant difference between administered and
predicted insulin doses for dinner (P = 0.004). The
last finding was the result of a consistent reduction of predinner
insulin doses from the predicted dose due to the appearance of
relatively low postprandial glucose responses to insulin at lunch.
Figure 3 displays the correlation between administered
and predicted preprandial insulin doses for each individual dose on the
day after the overnight insulin infusion (n = 48 doses;
y = 1.1x - 5.4; r = 0.88;
P < 0.001).
|
The possibility of hypoglycemia was of great concern, but only 34 of 438 measurements (7.8% during the entire protocol, including the insulin infusion and next day sc insulin injection) were below 90 mg/dL, and only 2 were below 60 mg/dL (<0.5%). One of the hypoglycemic episodes occurred during insulin infusion, and the infusion was discontinued for 30–60 min. Therapy (orange juice) was instituted in both instances.
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Fairly rapid control of hyperglycemia is often required in patients with diabetes admitted to the hospital for surgery, other invasive procedures, or deteriorated blood glucose control. In these cases, a trial and error method or sliding scale is often used to obtain improved glucose control. There is no standardized approach to the problem. Previous algorithm-based studies have involved mainly patients with type I diabetes (3, 9, 10). In the study by Mokan and Gerich (6), which also used a weight-based algorithm, only a small number of subjects with type II diabetes (9 of 29 subjects) were included. In contrast to that algorithm, ours used a lower rate of insulin infusion during the initial hyperglycemic phase. This probably accounts for the slower attainment of euglycemia (5 h vs. their 2–4 h) and a lower incidence of hypoglycemia in our study.
This algorithm appears to be useful in a relatively wide range of NIDDM, typical of many clinical situations. Because this is a weight-based algorithm, it was equally effective in both obese and lean type II diabetes mellitus patients. However, the initial overnight infusion was not successful in reducing blood glucose into the near-normoglycemia range in 3 of 30 subjects. This was probably due to greater insulin resistance in these 3 subjects, who had a body mass index that ranged between 28.6–38 kg/m2. When we repeated the infusion on a subsequent night using an adjusted algorithm that provided higher doses, blood glucose reached near-normoglycemia. Although the adjusted (increased dose) insulin algorithm is effective, we chose not to use it routinely in all patients because of an anticipated increased risk of hypoglycemia in more insulin-sensitive patients. Rather, a high dose insulin algorithm can be reserved for those patients that have shown themselves to have greater insulin resistance and, therefore, increased insulin requirements. We consider a 10% failure rate (to achieve near-normoglycemia) using this algorithm to be an excellent result, consistent with our attempt to achieve near-normoglycemia and minimize excessive hypoglycemia.
During the induction of normoglycemia, blood glucose was sampled at 60-min intervals. Thirty-minute sampling is too frequent for routine clinical use, but was used initially until the protocol was shown to be safe. We adopted a 60-min sampling frequency for induction of normoglycemia when analysis of the data indicated that this frequency would be adequate. However, after correction of hyperglycemia (<130 mg/dL), we recommend the use of 30-min sampling when blood glucose strays out of range, below 90 mg/dL or above 130 mg/dL. This allows for a more rapid response to deviations from the desired range. We had only one episode of hypoglycemia during the establishment of euglycemia with this algorithm. In contrast, algorithms with higher insulin infusion rates and more frequent blood sampling (6) have induced hypoglycemia that necessitated iv glucose injection. The algorithm used in this study resulted in only two measurements less than 60 mg/dL, one during induction of normoglycemia and one the following day. Both of these episodes occurred in the same subject, and neither of the episodes required iv glucose injection.
This algorithm has the added advantage of providing a basis for estimating insulin requirements for sc injection. The protocol was designed to calculate three preprandial regular insulin doses as an initial preparatory step, which would allow typical doses of medium and short acting insulin to be prescribed thereafter, but not tested here. The results indicate that overall daily insulin requirements were accurately predicted, although a small (but statistically significant) decrease in the insulin dose before dinner resulted in mean postprandial glucose concentrations that were higher after dinner than after lunch. It is likely that if the insulin doses originally predicted were actually given, glucose values after dinner would have been even better controlled. We, therefore, conclude that estimation of insulin dosage for sc delivery is reasonably accurate and is also safe. However, there is an important caveat to the estimation of insulin requirements: the algorithm should not be used if the majority of glucose values during euglycemia are greater than 130 mg/dL. The calculated EIR under these circumstances may overestimate insulin requirements for the following day.
The mean overall glucose concentration for the next day was 137.1 ± 6.1 mg/dL (n = 16). This is reasonably good control [if maintained, it would be equivalent to a hemoglobin A1c level of 6.7% (11), in keeping with the recommendations of the American Diabetes Association (1)]. Thus, based on the glucose concentrations achieved the next day, the EIR appears to be a valid basis for calculation of subsequent insulin needs. The EIR reflects the insulin infusion rates necessary to maintain basal glucose concentrations at near-normal concentrations. These are influenced by both the prevailing insulin sensitivity and residual insulin secretion. The EIR, therefore, represents a composite of complex physiological information, which may explain its accuracy in predicting insulin requirements compared with that of other commonly used clinical parameters of insulin need, such as weight or body mass index. The poor predictive value of weight to estimate specific insulin requirements can be derived from our data. Had we used a simple per kg basis for initiating insulin requirements in these patients, using the mean sc dose administered (0.9 U/kg), many subjects would have been given inappropriate insulin doses. Two of 16 subject would have received an excess of 20 U or more, and 5 would have been undertreated by 20 U or more.
It should be noted that the insulin doses used in this study were demonstrated to be effective for only 1 day. As a subject remains euglycemic over a longer period of time, insulin needs may also change due to a reduction in glucose toxicity (12). After the first day, the overnight insulin infusion can be repeated, or a dose of NPH insulin can be given to correspond with the overnight basal requirement (BIR) as calculated from the first night. Continued glucose monitoring is essential to further fine-tune the insulin dosage to the patient’s needs.
In summary, the availability of a safe and effective bedside algorithm to rapidly improve blood glucose is important in selected clinical situations faced by patients with NIDDM. This study demonstrates the feasibility of an algorithm-driven iv insulin infusion to normalize blood glucose in NIDDM that may be performed by nursing staff using a simple glucose meter and an infusion pump. This protocol can be used reliably and safely to induce near-normoglycemia overnight and can also be used to estimate sc insulin requirements. This methodology for estimating initial insulin needs to achieve good diabetes control appears to be safe and effective.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
|
Footnotes |
|---|
Received February 25, 1997.
Revised April 25, 1997.
Accepted April 30, 1997.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionSubjects and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  Z. T. Bloomgarden Inpatient Diabetes Control: Approaches to treatment Diabetes Care, September 1, 2004; 27(9): 2272 - 2277. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Clement, S. S. Braithwaite, M. F. Magee, A. Ahmann, E. P. Smith, R. G. Schafer, and I. B. Hirsch Management of Diabetes and Hyperglycemia in Hospitals Diabetes Care, February 1, 2004; 27(2): 553 - 591. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Endocrinology | Endocrine Reviews | J. Clin. End. & Metab. |
| Molecular Endocrinology | Recent Prog. Horm. Res. | All Endocrine Journals |
