Burned Adults Develop Profound Glucose Intolerance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Metabolic alterations after burn injury have been well described in children; however, in adult patients, glucose metabolism and insulin sensitivity are essentially unknown. We sought to characterize metabolic alterations and insulin resistance after burn injury and determine their magnitude and persistence at discharge. DESIGN: Prospective, cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary burn centre. PATIENTS: Nondiabetic adults with an acute burn involving greater than or equal to 20% total body surface area. INTERVENTIONS: An oral glucose tolerance test was administered at discharge. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Glucose, insulin, and C-peptide levels were measured to derive surrogate measures of insulin resistance and β-cell function, including quantitative insulin sensitivity check index, homeostasis model assessment of β-cell function, homeostasis model assessment of insulin sensitivity, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, and the composite whole-body insulin sensitivity index. Patients were grouped according to the degree of glucose tolerance: normal glucose tolerance, impaired fasting glucose/impaired glucose tolerance, or diabetes. Forty-five adults, 44 ± 15 years old and with 38% ± 14% total body surface area burned, underwent an oral glucose tolerance test at discharge. Median quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (0.348 [0.332-0.375]) and median homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (1.13 [0.69-1.45]) were abnormal, indicating insulin resistance and impaired insulin production at discharge. Two-thirds of patients (n = 28) met criteria for impaired fasting glucose/impaired glucose tolerance or diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated that burn-injured adults remain hyperglycemic, are insulin resistant, and express defects in insulin secretion at discharge. Patients with lower burn severity (total body surface area, 20-30%) express similar metabolic alterations as patients with larger burns (total body surface area, ≥ 30%). Glucose tolerance testing at discharge offers an opportunity for early identification of burn patients who may be at high risk of prediabetes and diabetes. Our findings demonstrated that two-thirds of burn patients had some degree of glucose intolerance. With this in mind, surveillance of glucose intolerance post discharge should be considered. As hyperglycemia and insulin resistance are associated with poor outcomes, studies should focus on how long these profound alterations persist.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".