Effects of Continuous Versus Intermittent Glucose Monitoring in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review With Meta‐Analysis
Pooled result · MortalityResult — go to the resultRelative risk 0.61 95% CI 0.35–1.04Authors' conclusion
CGM used for glucose management in ICU patients may reduce mortality and hypoglycemia, but the evidence is very uncertain.
Study context
- Population
- Intensive care unit (ICU) patients
- Participants
- 2,027 patients · 18 randomized clinical trials (RCTs)
- Comparison
- Continuous glucose monitoring vs point of care blood glucose measurement
- Outcome
- Mortality
Methodological detailsTrial Sequential Analysis, GRADE
- Trial Sequential Analysis
- GRADE
Pooled result
As reported in the abstract
Relative risk
0.61
95% CI 0.35–1.04
CGM vs POC
RR 0.61 (95% CI 0.35–1.04)
Further pooled results
| Outcome | RR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| Hypoglycaemia14 trials, 1515 participants · very low certainty evidence | 0.44 (0.23–0.82) | |
| 0.20.5125Relative risk (log scale) |
Glycaemic process outcomes
- Potential benefits of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) vs point of care (POC); certainty of evidence not evaluated
Remaining secondary outcomes
- Not reported in the trials
Original publication
Effects of Continuous Versus Intermittent Glucose Monitoring in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review With Meta‐Analysis. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. Published 30 March 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →