Effects of Continuous Versus Intermittent Glucose Monitoring in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review With Meta‐Analysis

Read full text
Authors: Christian Lange Gantzel, Milda Grigonyte‐Daraskeviciene, Mathias Maagaard, Peter Lommer Kristensen, Ulrik Pedersen‐Bjergaard, Mikkel Thor Olsen, Kirsten Nørgaard, A. Perner, Johan Mårtensson, Morten Hylander Møller, Morten Heiberg Bestle
Cited by: 4
References: 24

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Glucose management in intensive care unit (ICU) patients often relies on point of care (POC) blood glucose measurements. An increasing number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have investigated continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) compared to POC, but effects on patient-important outcomes are uncertain. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL and Web of Science. All reporting was done according to the PRISMA guideline. We included RCTs in ICU patients comparing the effects of CGM versus POC on glycemic and clinical outcomes. We performed meta-analyses, Trial Sequential Analysis, and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. RESULTS: We identified 1271 records and included 18 RCTs comparing CGM versus POC with a total of 2027 participants; 15 trials with 1600 participants reported on mortality (relative risk 0.61, 95% CI 0.35-1.04; very low certainty evidence) and 14 trials with 1515 participants on hypoglycemia (relative risk 0.44, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.82; very low certainty evidence). None of our remaining secondary outcomes were reported in the trials. We identified potential benefits of CGM versus POC on glycemic process outcomes; however, we did not evaluate certainty of evidence. CONCLUSIONS: CGM used for glucose management in ICU patients may reduce mortality and hypoglycemia, but the evidence is very uncertain. Sufficiently powered trials at low risk of bias are needed to confirm potential beneficial effects. EDITORIAL COMMENT: This meta-analysis reports the available literature on continuous versus intermittent monitoring of blood glucose in critically ill patients. The authors found that the available evidence was very uncertain, although continuous monitoring might improve outcomes. It is likely that this is partially due to lack of standardization of measurements and different management strategies. It is possible that the question is best answered with a larger trial with a well-defined treatment protocol.

Fields of Study & Subjects

Hyperglycemia and glycemic control in critically ill and hospitalized patients Diabetes Management and Research Diabetes Treatment and Management

Publication details

Journal / source
Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica
Publisher
Wiley
Volume
70
Issue
5
Pages
e70226–e70226
Publication date
30 March 2026
Language
EN