Comparison of Three Protocols for Tight Glycemic Control in Cardiac Surgery Patients

This study has been completed.
Sponsor:
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Jan Blaha, Charles University, Czech Republic
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT00764712
First received: October 1, 2008
Last updated: March 9, 2012
Last verified: March 2012

October 1, 2008
March 9, 2012
February 2008
April 2008   (final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
The effectiveness of different TGC management protocols [ Time Frame: ICU stay ] [ Designated as safety issue: No ]
Same as current
Complete list of historical versions of study NCT00764712 on ClinicalTrials.gov Archive Site
The safety with respect to hypoglycemia [ Time Frame: ICU stay ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ]
Same as current
Not Provided
Not Provided
 
Comparison of Three Protocols for Tight Glycemic Control in Cardiac Surgery Patients
Comparison of Three Protocols for Tight Glycemic Control in Cardiac Surgery Patients

A randomized trial to compare three insulin-titration protocols for tight glycemic control in surgical ICU: an absolute glucose (Matias) protocol, a relative glucose change (Bath) protocol, and an enhanced model predictive control algorithm (eMPC)

120 consecutive post-cardiac surgery patients randomized to the three protocols with a target glycemia range from 4.4 to 6.1 mmol/l. Intravenous insulin was administered continuously or in combination with insulin boluses (Matias protocol). Blood glucose was measured in 1-4 hour intervals as requested by protocols.

Interventional
Not Provided
Allocation: Randomized
Endpoint Classification: Safety/Efficacy Study
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Open Label
Primary Purpose: Treatment
Hyperglycemia
Drug: insulin
Insulin was was administered according to each protocol rules/suggestions into a central venous line as a continuous infusion (Bath and eMPC protocols) or as a combination of a continuous infusion and boluses (Matias protocol). A standard concentration of 50 IU of insulin in 50 ml of 0.9% NaCl was used. In all patients, infusion of 10% glucose solution was initiated upon admission to ICU with glucose dose of 2.5 g/kg of ideal body weight (height in centimetres minus 100) per hour and lasted for 18 hours, when normal oral food intake was started. In ventilated patients, the glucose infusion lasted for 48 hours, and then standard enteral nutrition was initiated.
Other Name: Actrapid HM, Novo Nordisk, Baegsvard, Denmark
  • Active Comparator: Matias protocol
    A protocol based on the absolute glucose value - Matias protocol (Matias)
    Intervention: Drug: insulin
  • Active Comparator: Bath protocol
    A protocol based on the relative glucose change - Bath protocol (Bath)
    Intervention: Drug: insulin
  • Active Comparator: eMPC
    a computer-based model predictive control algorithm with variable sampling rate (eMPC)
    Intervention: Drug: insulin
Blaha J, Kopecky P, Kotulak T, Kunstyr J, Matias M, Rubes D, Dobias M, Romaniv S, Kubatova J, Porizka M et al: Blood glucose control in cardiac surgery patients: a comparative study of different insulin protocols. Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia 2008, 22(S3):S23.

*   Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline.
 
Completed
120
April 2008
April 2008   (final data collection date for primary outcome measure)

Inclusion Criteria:

  • patients admitted to the postoperative ICU after elective cardiac surgery

Exclusion Criteria:

  • insulin allergy
Both
18 Years to 90 Years
No
Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects
Czech Republic
 
NCT00764712
POINT-protocols, GAUK no. 44407
No
Jan Blaha, Charles University, Czech Republic
Charles University, Czech Republic
Not Provided
Principal Investigator: Jan Blaha, MD Charles University, Czech Republic
Charles University, Czech Republic
March 2012

ICMJE     Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP