4.5 Article

The relationship between lactate and thiamine levels in patients with diabetic ketoacidosis

期刊

JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
卷 29, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2013.06.008

关键词

Thiamine; Thiamine deficiency; Lactic acidosis; Diabetic ketoacidosis; Diabetes mellitus

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [1K02HL107447-01A1]
  2. National Institutes of Health [1R21AT005119-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Thiamine functions as an important cofactor in aerobic metabolism and thiamine deficiency can contribute to lactic acidosis. Although increased rates of thiamine deficiency have been described in diabetic outpatients, this phenomenon has not been studied in relation to diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). In the present study, we hypothesize that thiamine deficiency is associated with elevated lactate in patients with DKA. Materials and Methods: This was a prospective observational study of patients presenting to a tertiary care center with DKA. Patient demographics, laboratory results, and outcomes were recorded. A one-time blood draw was performed and analyzed for plasma thiamine levels. Results: Thirty-two patients were enrolled. Eight patients (25%) were thiamine deficient, with levels lower than 9 nmol/L. A negative correlation between lactic acid and plasma thiamine levels was found (r = -0.56, P = .002). This relationship remained significant after adjustment for APACHE II scores (P = .009). Thiamine levels were directly related to admission serum bicarbonate (r = 0.44, P =. 019), and patients with thiamine deficiency maintained lower bicarbonate levels over the first 24 hours (slopes parallel with a difference of 4.083, P = .002). Conclusions: Patients with DKA had a high prevalence of thiamine deficiency. Thiamine levels were inversely related to lactate levels among patients with DKA. A study of thiamine supplementation in DKA is warranted. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据