↓ Skip to main content

The incretin effect in critically ill patients: a case–control study

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
57 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The incretin effect in critically ill patients: a case–control study
Published in
Critical Care, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13054-015-1118-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Signe Tellerup Nielsen, Susanne Janum, Rikke Krogh-Madsen, Thomas P. Solomon, Kirsten Møller

Abstract

Patients admitted to the intensive care unit often develop hyperglycaemia, but the underlying mechanisms have not been fully described. The incretin effect is reduced in patients with type 2 diabetes. Type 2 diabetes and critical illness have phenotypical similarities, such as hyperglycaemia, insulin resistance and systemic inflammation. Previous studies have shown beneficial effects of exogenous glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 on glycaemia in critically ill patients, a phenomenon also seen in patients with type 2 diabetes. In this study, we hypothesised that the incretin effect, which is mediated by the incretin hormones GLP-1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP), is impaired in critically ill patients. The incretin effect (i.e., the relative difference between the insulin response to oral and intravenous glucose administration) was investigated in a cross-sectional case-control study. Eight critically ill patients without diabetes admitted to a mixed intensive care unit and eight healthy control subjects without diabetes, matched at group level by age, sex and body mass index, were included in the study. All subjects underwent an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) followed by an intravenous glucose infusion (IVGI) on the next day to mimic the blood glucose profile from the OGTT. Blood glucose, serum insulin, serum C-peptide and plasma levels of GLP-1, GIP, glucagon and proinflammatory cytokines were measured intermittently. The incretin effect was calculated as the increase in insulin secretion during oral versus intravenous glucose administration in six patients. The groups were compared using either Student's t test or a mixed model of repeated measurements. Blood glucose levels were matched between the OGTT and the IVGI in both groups. Compared with control subjects, proinflammatory cytokines, tumour necrosis factor α and interleukin 6, were higher in patients than in control subjects. The endogenous response of GIP and glucagon, but not GLP-1, to the OGTT was greater in patients. The insulin response to the OGTT did not differ between groups, whereas the insulin response to the IVGI was higher in patients. Consequently, the calculated incretin effect was lower in patients (23 vs. 57 %, p = 0.003). In critically ill patients, the incretin effect was reduced. This resembles previous findings in patients with type 2 diabetes. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01347801 . Registered on 2 May 2011.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Unknown 56 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 18%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 11%
Other 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 15 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 37%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 18 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 November 2015.
All research outputs
#14,388,865
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#4,749
of 6,554 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,885
of 395,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#394
of 466 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,554 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 395,421 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 466 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.