Letter
Evidence-lost to tight glycemic control?
-
* Corresponding author: Marcus J Schultz m.j.schultz@amc.uva.nl
1 Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
2 Laboratory of Experimental Intensive Care and Anesthesiology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
3 HERMES Critical Care Group, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
4 Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Gelre Hospital – Location Lukas, Albert Schweitzerlaan 31, 7334 DZ Apeldoorn, The Netherlands
5 Department of Medical Informatics, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
6 Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Mayo Clinic, First Street 200 Rochester, Minnesota, MN 55905 USA
7 Mayo Epidemiology and Translational Research in Intensive Care, Mayo Clinic, First Street 200 Rochester, Minnesota, MN 55905 USA
Critical Care 2008, 12:430 doi:10.1186/cc7022
Published: 20 October 2008First paragraph (this article has no abstract)
In recent years, the field of intensive care medicine has had the benefit of learning from two randomized controlled trials that tight glycemic control (TGC) is beneficial to critically ill patients [1,2]. No benefit was found by two other clinical trials, however, hampering implementation of TGC in daily practice [3,4]. The question arises of whether the intensive care community interprets the results of these later trials in the correct way. What are the alternative explanations for why two trials do show beneficial effects while two other trials do not, apart from the possibility that TGC may indeed not benefit critically ill patients?