4.7 Article

Characteristics of Patients With Sulphonurea-Induced Hypoglycemia

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2010.07.014

关键词

Hypoglycemia; elderly; malnutrition; renal failure; sulphonylurea; type 2 diabetes mellitus

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background/Aim: Sulphonylurea (SU) agents continue to be a cornerstone of the therapy of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Hypoglycemia is the most dangerous side effect of SU. Identifying the characteristics of patients with SU-induced hypoglycemia (SUIH) may help in reducing its frequency. Methods: All consecutive admissions of patients with SUIH, between 2000 and 2008, were retrospectively reviewed. Results: Over the study period, 4702 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were admitted to the department of medicine. Of these, 155 patients were admitted because of SUIH. Most of these patients were elderly, had multiple comorbid situations, and were taking multiple medications. Almost a third of the patients had a history of recent changes in the use of their medications. Various infectious complications (urinary, lung, skin, and peritoneal) occurred in 43% of patients. Renal failure was a frequent finding at admission (44% of patients had creatinine plasma levels > 120 mu mol/L). Poor oral intake before admission was reported by 31% of patients. Markers of malnutrition (low serum levels of albumin, iron, vitamin B-12, and folic acid) were frequently found in most patients. Mean hemoglobin A1C levels were in the low abnormal levels. A major vascular event during hospitalization co-occurred in 11% of patients. Three patients died during the hospital admission for SUIH. Conclusions: Elderly fragile patients with multiple comorbid situations including renal failure and tight glycemic control are prone to develop SUIH. Sulphonylurea agents should be avoided in such patients. An episode of SUIH should be considered as an alarming prognostic marker. Copyright (C) 2012 - American Medical Directors Association, Inc.

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

4.7
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