Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 3, 2026

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
Published on: April 19, 2024
Intensive glucose control for critically ill patients: an updated meta-analysis
Yongli Fu1, Yaowu Sun2, Jiankun Zhang3
1Department of Endocrinology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Qiqihar Medical College, Qiqihar, Heilongjiang Province, People's Republic of China.
Intensive glucose control in critically ill patients did not reduce mortality or sepsis risk. However, it significantly increased the risk of hypoglycemia, a critical safety concern for these patients.
Area of Science:
- Critical Care Medicine
- Endocrinology
- Clinical Trials Methodology
Background:
- Critically ill patients often experience hyperglycemia, necessitating glucose management strategies.
- Intensive glucose control (IGC) aims to maintain blood glucose levels within a narrow, lower range.
- Previous evidence on IGC's efficacy and safety in critical care has been conflicting.
Purpose of the Study:
- To update the evidence on the effects of intensive glucose control versus conventional glucose control in critically ill patients.
- To evaluate IGC's impact on mortality, sepsis, and renal outcomes.
- To assess the safety profile of IGC, particularly the risk of hypoglycemia.
Main Methods:
- Systematic literature review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published up to December 2017.
- Searched major databases: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library.
- Applied random-effect models to calculate summary relative risks (RRs) for various outcomes.
Main Results:
- IGC did not significantly decrease short-term (in-hospital/ICU) or 3- to 6-month mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92-1.06; RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97-1.08).
- No significant reduction in the risk of sepsis (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.89-1.11) or new need for dialysis (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84-1.11) was observed with IGC.
- IGC was associated with a nearly 4-fold increase in the risk of hypoglycemia (RR 4.86, 95% CI 3.16-7.46).
Conclusions:
- Updated meta-analysis indicates IGC offers no significant mortality benefit for critically ill patients.
- IGC does not reduce the risk of sepsis or the need for dialysis in this population.
- The significantly higher risk of hypoglycemia underscores safety concerns associated with IGC in critical care settings.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Critical Region, Critical Values and Significance Level
In hypothesis testing, a sample statistic is converted to a test statistic using z, t, or chi-square distribution. A critical region is an area under the curve in probability distributions demarcated by the critical value. When the test statistic falls in this region, it suggests that the null hypothesis must be rejected. As this region contains all those values of the...
Glucose Homeostasis: Regulation of Blood Glucose
During fasting, when blood glucose levels are low, the pancreas secretes glucagon. it...
Directing Effect of Substituents: meta-Directing Groups
Critical Values
Sound Intensity
Critical Thinking I

