MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204047640 · doi:10.1017/s1049023x21001047

Dextrose 50% versus Dextrose 10% or Dextrose Titration for the Treatment of Out-of-Hospital Hypoglycemia: A Systematic Review

2021· review· en· W3204047640 on OpenAlexaff
Marissa Hurtubise, Jeffery Stirling, J Greene, Alix Carter, Janel Swain, Ryan Brown, Dana Fidgen, Judah Goldstein

Bibliographic record

VenuePrehospital and Disaster Medicine · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityNova Scotia Health Authority
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRandomized controlled trialHypoglycemiaObservational studyGlycemicEmergency departmentMeta-analysisDapagliflozinAdverse effectEmergency medicineInternal medicineAnesthesiaDiabetes mellitusInsulinEndocrinologyType 2 diabetes

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Paramedics commonly administer intravenous (IV) dextrose to severely hypoglycemic patients. Typically, the treatment provided is a 25g ampule of 50% dextrose (D50). This dose of D50 is meant to ensure a return to consciousness. However, this dose may cause harm and lead to difficulties regulating blood glucose levels (BGLs) post-treatment. It is hypothesized that a lower concentration, such as 10% dextrose (D10), may improve symptoms while minimizing harm. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central were systematically searched on September 15, 2020. The PRISMA guidelines were followed. GRADE and risk of bias were applied to determine the certainty of the evidence. Primary literature investigating the use of IV dextrose in hypoglycemic diabetic patients presenting to paramedics or the emergency department was included. Outcomes of interest included safety, efficacy (symptom resolution), and BGL. RESULTS: Of 680 abstracts screened, 51 full-text articles were reviewed, with eleven studies included. Data from three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and eight observational studies were analyzed. A single RCT comparing D10 to D50 was identified. The primary significant finding of the study was an increased post-treatment glycemic profile by 3.2mmol/L in the D50 group; no other outcomes had significant differences between groups. When comparing pooled data from all the included studies, there was greater symptom resolution in the D10 group (95.9%) compared to the D50 group (88.8%). However, the mean time to resolution was approximately four minutes longer in the D10 group (4.1 minutes [D50] versus 8.0 minutes [D10]). There was a greater need for subsequent doses with the use of D10 (19.5%) compared to D50 (8.1%). The post-treatment glycemic profile was lower in the D10 group at 6.2mmol/L versus 8.5mmol/L in the D50 group. Both treatments had nearly complete resolution of hypoglycemia: 98.7% (D50) and 99.2% (D10). No adverse events were observed in the D10 group (0/1057) compared to 13/310 adverse events in the D50 group. CONCLUSION: Studies show D10 may be as effective as D50 at resolving symptoms and correcting hypoglycemia. Although the desired effect can take several minutes longer, there appear to be fewer adverse events. The post-D10-treatment BGL may result in fewer untoward hyperglycemic episodes.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.009
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePrehospital and Disaster MedicineSame topicHyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patientsFrench-language works237,207