首页> 外文期刊>JAMA: the Journal of the American Medical Association >Pediatric Critical Care, Glycemic Control, and Hypoglycemia
【24h】

Pediatric Critical Care, Glycemic Control, and Hypoglycemia

机译:儿科重症监护,血糖控制和低血糖

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

A COMMON FEATURE OF CRITICAL ILLNESS IS PER-turbed homeostasis. Thus, a central dogma of critical care has been the belief that normalizing any physiologic perturbation will promote recovery. This belief underpins the strategy of setting physiologic goals and initiating "goal-directed therapy." One of the most debated strategies in the last decade is tight glycemic control (TGC). Faced with the common occurrence of hyperglycemia in many critical illnesses, researchers and clinicians have asked by how much, and with what effort, should blood glucose levels be reduced or "normalized"? The question is pertinent because any attempt to reduce an elevated blood glucose level might overcorrect, inducing hypoglycemia with potentially devastating consequences. Therefore, should clinicians target "normal" (80-100 mg/ dL) ranges, modestly elevated ranges (eg, 140-180 mg/dL or 180-200 mg/dL), or simply avoid high levels (eg, >216 mg/dL)? Is it the range that is important, or is it limiting variability and the allostatic load that is required?
机译:严重疾病的一个共同特征是动荡的动态平衡。因此,重症监护的中心教条一直认为使任何生理扰动正常化将促进康复。这种信念支撑了制定生理目标和启动“目标导向疗法”的策略。过去十年间争议最大的策略之一是严格的血糖控制(TGC)。面对许多重要疾病中常见的高血糖症,研究人员和临床医生问到应降低血糖水平或“正常化”多少,并以何种努力?这个问题是相关的,因为任何降低血糖水平的尝试都可能过度矫正,从而导致低血糖症,并可能造成毁灭性后果。因此,临床医生应以“正常”(80-100 mg / dL)范围,适度升高的范围(例如140-180 mg / dL或180-200 mg / dL)为目标,还是简单地避免高水平(例如,> 216 mg / dL)?是重要的范围,还是它限制了变异性和所需的同静负荷?

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号