MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2473643350 · doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000001845

Glucose Control in Severely Burned Patients Using Metformin

2016· article· en· W2473643350 on OpenAlexaff
Marc G. Jeschke, Abdikarim Abdullahi, Marjorie Burnett, Sarah Rehou, Mile Stanojcic

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Surgery · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients
Canadian institutionsSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Institute of General Medical Sciences
KeywordsMedicineMetforminIntensive care medicineInternal medicineMEDLINEInsulin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether metformin can achieve glucose control no worse than insulin (noninferiority) without the danger of hypoglycemia (superiority). In addition, to assess whether metformin has any additional effects on lipolysis and inflammation that will enhance burn recovery (superiority). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Hyperglycemia and insulin resistance after burn injury are associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Insulin administration improves postburn infections, severity of sepsis, and morbidity, but also causes a 4-5-fold increase in hypoglycemia, which is associated with a 9-fold increase in mortality. METHODS: Severely burned adult patients with burns over 20% total body surface area (TBSA) burn were prospectively randomized in this Phase II clinical trial to either metformin or insulin (standard of care) treatment. Primary outcomes were glucose levels and incidence of hypoglycemia. Secondary outcomes included glucose and fat metabolism, and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were enrolled in this Phase II clinical trial, 18 metformin and 26 insulin patients. Demographics, burn size, concomitant injuries, and mortality were comparable between both groups. Metformin controlled blood glucose as equally as insulin with no difference between the 2 treatment groups, P > 0.05. While there was a 15% incidence of hypoglycemia in the insulin group, there was only 1 mild hypoglycemic episode (6%) in the metformin group, P < 0.05. Oral glucose tolerance tests at discharge revealed that metformin significantly improved insulin sensitivity, P < 0.05. Furthermore, metformin had a strong antilipolytic effect after burn injury when compared with insulin and was associated with significantly reduced inflammation, P < 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: Metformin decreases glucose equally as effective as insulin without causing hypoglycemia, with additional benefits including improved insulin resistance and decreased endogenous insulin synthesis when compared with insulin controls. These results indicate that metformin is safe in burn patients and further supports the use of metformin in severely burned patients for postburn control of hyperglycemia and insulin resistance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.188
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.165 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations63
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of SurgerySame topicHyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patientsFrench-language works237,207