4.3 Article

Glucose control using an artificial pancreas in a severe COVID-19 patient on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation: a case report

期刊

JOURNAL OF ANESTHESIA
卷 35, 期 4, 页码 586-590

出版社

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s00540-021-02965-1

关键词

Artificial pancreas; Continuous glucose monitoring; COVID-19; Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems in adult patients with severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been reported to be useful and safe. A closed-loop device, such as the STG-55, showed potential utility in controlling glucose levels in a critically ill patient with severe COVID-19.
The usefulness and safety of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems in adult patients with severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19) have been reported. Using CGM might reduce the exposure patients and healthcare workers to COVID-19 and limit the use of personal protective equipment during the pandemic. CGM devices measure glucose in the subcutaneous interstitial fluid, but the accuracy of this technique has not been established in critically ill patients. The artificial pancreas, STG-55 (Nikkiso, Tokyo), is a closed-loop device that conducts continuous blood glucose monitoring using a peripheral vein. We used the STG-55 for glucose control in a 60-year-old woman with severe COVID-19 admitted to the intensive care unit. Due to severe respiratory failure, the patient was intubated, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was introduced. Because she had hyperglycemia despite high-dose intravenous insulin therapy, we decided to use STG-55 for glucose control. The STG-55 safely titrated the insulin infusion and monitored glucose levels. Fifty-six hours after adopting the STG-55, it was removed because the blood sampling failed. No episodes of hypoglycemia were observed despite deep sedation during this period. In conclusion, this case demonstrates the potential utility of an artificial pancreas in patients with severe COVID-19.

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

4.3
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