Citations

ABSTRACT Background The optimal timing for basal insulin initiation in diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) remains unclear. British guidelines endorse early basal insulin (EBI), while the American Diabetes Association emphasises overlap duration with intravenous insulin, without mention of timing. This meta‐analysis evaluates whether EBI administration of basal insulin improves clinical outcomes in adults with DKA. Methods A systematic review and meta‐analysis were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. Databases searched included MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through December 11, 2024. Inclusion criteria included articles in the English‐language randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies evaluating EBI in adult DKA patients. Non‐human studies, conference abstracts, and case reports were excluded. The primary outcome for this study was hospital length of stay (LOS). Additional outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, time to DKA resolution, hypoglycemia, and rebound hyperglycemia between EBI and usual care. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane and Newcastle‐Ottawa tools. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation was performed to evaluate the quality of evidence. Results From 1214 identified studies, eight (4 RCTs, 4 observational) met inclusion criteria for a total of 247 patients in the EBI group and 552 patients in the control group. No significant difference in hospital LOS was found (mean difference −11.17 h; 95% CI: −29.91 to 7.56). ICU LOS, time to DKA resolution, incidence of hypoglycemia, and rebound hyperglycemia also did not demonstrate any significant differences between groups. Significant heterogeneity existed across studies for most outcomes. All studies had a high risk of bias, and the quality of evidence was very low. Conclusion EBI did not result in significant differences in hospital LOS, ICU LOS, or time to DKA resolution; however, there were no increased adverse events with EBI. Current studies of early EBI have significant limitations. Future research should focus on developing high‐quality RCTs.

Abstract Background: Understanding of the diagnosis and treatment of adults with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) has evolved thanks to new evidence, experience, and emerging technologies. This document updates evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on four key questions for the diagnosis and management of adult patients with CAP. Methods: A multidisciplinary panel integrated systematic reviews of comparative evidence with other relevant research and clinical experience, then applied Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology to produce recommendations using the Evidence to Decision Framework. Results: The panel formulated clinical recommendations that address questions related to CAP, including lung ultrasound for diagnosis, empiric antibacterial therapy if a test for a respiratory virus is positive, antibiotic duration, and the use of systemic corticosteroids. Conclusions: The panel formulated and provided the rationale for recommendations on selected diagnostic and treatment strategies for adult patients with CAP.

OBJECTIVES: To provide guidance on the reporting of norepinephrine formulation labeling, reporting in publications, and use in clinical practice. DESIGN: Review and task force position statements with necessary guidance. SETTING: A series of group conference calls were conducted from August 2023 to October 2023, along with a review of the available evidence and scope of the problem. SUBJECTS: A task force of multinational and multidisciplinary critical care experts assembled by the Society of Critical Care Medicine and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine. INTERVENTIONS: The implications of a variation in norepinephrine labeled as conjugated salt (i.e., bitartrate or tartrate) or base drug in terms of effective concentration of norepinephrine were examined, and guidance was provided. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were significant implications for clinical care, dose calculations for enrollment in clinical trials, and results of datasets reporting maximal norepinephrine equivalents. These differences were especially important in the setting of collaborative efforts across countries with reported differences. CONCLUSIONS: A joint task force position statement was created outlining the scope of norepinephrine-dose formulation variations, and implications for research, patient safety, and clinical care. The task force advocated for a uniform norepinephrine-base formulation for global use, and offered advice aimed at appropriate stakeholders.